SCO sueing everybody

[TimH]

Well, I will never buy another SCO product! friggin ridiculous :mad:

Corporations get second warning (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/153612_linuxwarning23.html)

[Meerkat]

:D :D :D

I don't know if you're actually a buyer of SCO product, but this sounds like a last desperate ploy on their part. The court, within the past couple of weeks, gave them 30 days to "put up or shut up" and deliver concrete proof of the alleged infringing code in the IBM suit. At that point, they could well get laughed out of the room.

Knowledgable people in the industry, who incidentally give SCO very low odds of prevailing in the suit, have counselled earlier letter recipients to do nothing until the SCO:IBM suit is adjuticated, but also not to make any big plans around Linux until it is adjuticated.

Some people believe that SCO's suit is nothing more than a form of a "pump and dump" operation to inflate the company's flagging stock. Litigation has done well for them so far...

One of the early backers and substantial contributors to this farce is a certain evil empire, home based in Redmond, WA - to the tune of $8 million.

[ 12-23-2003, 03:33 AM: Message edited by: Meerkat ]

[TimH]

I see no need for SCO products actually. Why buy a Unix when you can get one for free? :D

[Meerkat]

Yeah, that's their problem in a nutshell! :D

[cs]

We use to have SCO server we ran here at work, but when I switched some of the stations to NT4.0 I couldn't find the software to link them up. The problem was some stations were running Win 95 and some NT. We were using PC Enterprise to talk to the server with Win 98 but it wouldn't work with NT. So we found some software that would work with NT but it wouldn't work with Win 98. So we just gave up and went with an NT server and never looked back.

Chad

[LaMess]

SCO'K They won't have any products for much longer.

[LaMess]

It'll take just a couple more years to dispatch the evil empire (alright maybe four).

**** the profit motive!!! Freedom and Cooperation Rule!!

"Who needs fences when gates are free?!?!?!"

Typed from my free and legal fully functional Linux/GNU desktop/workstation.

Eat our dust WinDoze aficionadoes.

[LaMess]

Almost forgot:

FREE THE CODE!

[Donn]

http://www.poster.net/picasso-pablo/picasso-pablo-don-quixote-2405070.jpg

[LaMess]

Donn- good one :D

[Peter Malcolm Jardine]

As the internet and the computer world become middle-aged, there will be more of this... ;)

[Donn]

Server market in 2002:
5.7 million total shipments
Microsoft increased from 50.5% in 2001, to 55.1% in 2002
Linux increased from 22.4% to 23.1%

Client market in 2002:
121 million total shipments
Microsoft increased from 93.2% in 2001, to 93.8% in 2002
Linux increased from 2.3% to 2.8% (Mac was at 2.9%)

[Meerkat]

Originally posted by Donn:
Server market in 2002:
5.7 million total shipments
Microsoft increased from 50.5% in 2001, to 55.1% in 2002
Linux increased from 22.4% to 23.1%

Client market in 2002:
121 million total shipments
Microsoft increased from 93.2% in 2001, to 93.8% in 2002
Linux increased from 2.3% to 2.8% (Mac was at 2.9%)Source?

[Donn]

Source (http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB20031008S0013)

[Meerkat]

Cherry picking reports is always fun! :D

Debunking the Linux-Windows Market share myth (http://linuxworld.sys-con.com/story/32648_f.htm)

Your figures are great for Intel platforms, but it differs greatly if you include all CPU architectures. Linux/Unix then leads Windows servers about about 10-15%

[Donn]

The TechWeb numbers aren't just Intel installations, they're total shipments. The increases are attributed to Intel based shipments.

The real proof is in the revenue picture.

"Even though 2002 was a slow year for IT spending, overall revenues from operating systems and subsystems grew by 4.3 percent to $18.6 billion, led by a 12.4 percent increase in revenues aboard the Windows platform. With the exception of the paid Linux environment, all other operating systems experienced negative revenue growth in 2002"

[Meerkat]

The increase in revenue could be due to Microsoft's new (and very unpopular) licensing policy.

[Donn]

Do you mean the certificate of authenticity billing thing? Which licensing revenue, client or server?

[Meerkat]

Microsoft has moved to an annual licensing program (client and server), at least for business customers - so far. Instead of renewing/upgrading when it makes business sense, businesses will now have to renew annually. To add insult to injury, the new per/year licensing fees are higher then the ad hoc licensing fees where. Revenue is bound to go up, at least in the short term. Long term, it could have negative impact as companies move towards other (Linux) alternatives.

[ 12-23-2003, 01:08 PM: Message edited by: Meerkat ]

[Donn]

Please be specific. New licensing programs for what software?

[Meerkat]

:rolleyes: Windows, Office, SQL Server, Exchange Server and etc.

So far, they're not doing it with retail boxed or OEM consumer product.

Also, not so new - they rolled it out last Winter and Spring, IIRC. Much negative press.

Edited to add: Longer ago than I thought: http://news.com.com/2100-1001-908773.html

The cash bonanza for Microsoft due to the licensing change is sizable. For instance, Microsoft pulled in an extra $1 billion during the first three quarters of its 2002 fiscal year for Office, just one of several products affected by the change. The change, according to Gartner, raised licensing fees paid by customers between 33 percent and 107 percent. More Software Assurance subscribers, fees from other software subscription programs, and other sales relating to the change in licensing could account for another $1 billion increase in the future.


[ 12-23-2003, 01:28 PM: Message edited by: Meerkat ]

[LaMess]

Donn - I figured four years because I understand that it takes some people al ot longer to learn stuff than it should.

[Donn]

Don't roll your eyes! You don't understand the issue clearly, so you aren't expressing it clearly. The conversation is about Microsoft getting knocked off by Linux. As far as I know, they only compete in client and server OS software. Office isn't in either of those segments of Microsoft's business.

Further, the OEM channel is a substantial chunk of client and server sales. The primary reason that their client and server revenue is up is because of increased unit sales.

[Meerkat]

The competition is between Microsoft and open source software, which includes Star Office/Open Office: a direct competitor with MS Office. There's a new MS Exchange analog out now too, funded, in part, by the German government because they wanted an alternative.

[TimH]

Well I run Microsoft Word on my Linux box, as well as OpenOffice in case I happen to need to print something from the Windows lab at school. As far as software development goes..all our assignments are tested on Linux. Not Windows. If it runs on g++ you are ok.

MicroSoft Visual C++ Deficiencies (http://www.medini.org/software/msviscxx/)

It seems that MS development software is designed for development of Windows programs only. It is not in compliance with ANSI standards. Why support cross platform compatibilty when your goal is to stiffle competition?

[Donn]

Isn't there a thing called CrossOver, that enables all MS Office apps to run on Linux?

[TimH]

Originally posted by Donn:
Isn't there a thing called CrossOver, that enables all MS Office apps to run on Linux?Yes. Its based on Wine, but targets MS Office apps more specifically. Works very well BTW. And its cheaper to buy a CD from Suse called Winerack than to buy Crossover.

[Donn]

Then there's no concern for Mr. Softee. I've never used OpenOffice, but I don't think the world business community is going to drop Excel and Word in the near future, and if they can run on Linux boxes, that makes Linux nothing but another market for Microsoft.

[TimH]

You may have noticed how kids now days all are very computer literate compared to the generation that is in their 30's and older. I am amazed at how fast kids pick up even complex things like computer programming. I would guess that as the general computer using populous becomes (much more) computer literate they will seek out open source software over Microsoft. Microsoft's plan has always been to hide the workings of software from people. To make software as idiot proof and illiterate user friendly as they can. The more you know about computers, the more you dont want to be able to customize and modify your software. This is why Open source will prevail in the long run. Microsofts whole ideology is dated and they know this. This is why they have such a cut-throat business philosophy even though they are so dominant and filthy rich right now.

[Donn]

Tim..you suffer the same delusion that most do, with regard to the market for software. You think that the 'normal' computer user is the precocious kid who can program. You use this delusional idea to predict the downfall of Microsoft.

Please understand..the most common computer user doesn't know Windows from Linux from DOS. They get to work, fire up a Windows box, which autostarts the one or two apps that they will use in the next 8 hours. In many cases, they just sit down in an already warmed chair, from the previous shift, and login to those few apps, which are already open, and could be running on any OS.

Until somebody comes along with an OS that can compete with Windows, or apps that can compete with Excel and Word, Mr. Softee will continue to do just fine. $8 billion a quarter, at very nice margins. If the market changes, they'll change with it, like they have always done. It wouldn't surprise me at all to find out that they are working on Linux now. In fact, I'm quite sure they are.

[Meerkat]

Why are you so sure that Microsoft is "working on Linux right now"?

[Donn]

I have friends at Microsoft.

[TimH]

Donn, you didnt read what I just wrote. The majority of people who spend money on software in the next 10 to 15 years will be people who know computers very well. Not like the current average consumer of software products.

[TimH]

Originally posted by Donn:
I have friends at Microsoft.Well in that case You must know what you are talking about.... :rolleyes:

and yes...Microsoft studies Linux very closely, If you look at the evolution of windows over the last 10 years its funny how it has assumed a lot of the features of the X-windows UI. Windows XP has even made an attempt at virtual consoles :D

[Meerkat]

I've worked at MS on and off for several years and know quite a few folk at MS. It's very unlikely that MS is studying Linux with any view towards offering products for it. I'm sure marketing studies more ways to torpedo it though.

Microsoft was an early member of the X Consortium, so it's no accident that there are echos of X Windows in MS Windows.

BTW, Microsoft is not a software company - they, like IBM before them, are a marketing and sales company that happens to market software, hardware and services. That's why their software is such slock. They're selling form with just enough substance to pull people in - "it ain't the steak, it's the sizzle".

[TimH]

"it ain't the steak, it's the sizzle".Thats for sure. And look at what has happened to the WWW after Microsoft knocked Netscape out of the browser market. There has been no innovation since. All the innovation came from the Netscape and Mosaic folks. Microsoft sure put an end to that one. Its no wonder they have all these suits pending.

[Donn]

,
Originally posted by TimH:
Donn, you didnt read what I just wrote. The majority of people who spend money on software in the next 10 to 15 years will be people who know computers very well. Not like the current average consumer of software products.Tim..the majority of the dollars spent on software in the next 10-15 years, will be the same as the "current average consumer." Business, just like the "current average consumer of software products."

[Donn]

Originally posted by Meerkat:
I've worked at MS on and off for several years and know quite a few folk at MS. It's very unlikely that MS is studying Linux with any view towards offering products for it. I'm sure marketing studies more ways to torpedo it though.

Microsoft was an early member of the X Consortium, so it's no accident that there are echos of X Windows in MS Windows.

BTW, Microsoft is not a software company - they, like IBM before them, are a marketing and sales company that happens to market software, hardware and services. That's why their software is such slock. They're selling form with just enough substance to pull people in - "it ain't the steak, it's the sizzle".Meer..it's likely that the folks that I know at Microsoft, are different from the folks you know at Microsoft. Be careful about your claims of inside understanding of their workings.

[Meerkat]

Originally posted by Donn:
Meer..it's likely that the folks that I know at Microsoft, are different from the folks you know at Microsoft. Be careful about your claims of inside understanding of their workings.Ditto - insider trading: not a problem I have.

[TimH]

Donn,
Well Steve Ballmer lives across the street from me so you better watch out :D