Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Caldera Operating Systems Software Unix

SCO Announces Product Line Updates 383

Posted by timothy from the lifejacketed-rats dept.
ArbiterOne writes "Techworld has the story: SCO has unveiled their upcoming product plans, including a new release of UnixWare and a version for point-of-sale devices. Oddly enough, the article states that 'SCO's continuing Unix intellectual property lawsuits against IBM, Novell and others is apparently putting customers off.' I wonder how that could have happened?"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

SCO Announces Product Line Updates More

SCO Announces Product Line Updates

Comments Filter:

  • SCO Has Products? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Ridgelift ( 228977 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:18AM (#9442880)
    The SCO Group has produced a new-product road map and an aggressive marketing plan to try and recharge its flagging core Unix business.

    SCO actually produces a product?
    • > SCO actually produces a product?

      Well, billable lawyer hours are kind of a virtual product...

    • Re:SCO Has Products? (Score:4, Funny)

      by svallarian ( 43156 ) <svallarian@h[ ]ail.com ['otm' in gap]> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:28AM (#9443015)
      I hear they're the number one producer of bullshit in Utah!

      Steven V>

      • Re:SCO Has Products? (Score:5, Funny)

        by _Sprocket_ ( 42527 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:56AM (#9443324)
        It only makes sense. Darl has pointed out that he's a cattleman. And if there's one thing a cattleman knows about, it is the byproducts of cattle.

      • Re:SCO Has Products? (Score:5, Funny)

        by Pfhreak ( 662302 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:04PM (#9443419)
        No, Orin Hatch is the number one producer of bullshit in Utah.

    • Re:SCO Has Products? (Score:5, Funny)

      by SIGALRM ( 784769 ) * on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:29AM (#9443038) Journal
      SCO actually produces a product?

      In a sense, SCO itself is a product...

      ... of AT&T, Novell, Linux, IBM, etc...
    • No, SCO produces road maps and marketing plans, and well as other sorts of press releases.

    • Famous last words? (Score:4, Informative)

      by kuwan ( 443684 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:39AM (#9443153) Homepage
      Taken from the SCO Q2 Conference Call transcript [groklaw.net] on Groklaw, [groklaw.net] could these be Darl McBride's famous last words?

      Mark my words, there will be a day that will come when you will all see many, many documents that will directly contradict IBM's current public posturing.

    • UnixWare is great! (Score:5, Funny)

      by nule.org ( 591224 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:55AM (#9443317) Homepage
      7.1.4 now comes with 27% more lawsuit!

  • So (Score:5, Funny)

    by FictionPimp ( 712802 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:19AM (#9442884) Homepage
    Does this mean they actually have developers? Or did they just up the product version number?

    • Re:So (Score:5, Funny)

      by ari_j ( 90255 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:28AM (#9443022)
      Don't you think they're a little underqualified to be changing version numbers? That'd break all sorts of dependencies. It's much easier to keep the same version number and just put it in a different box.

    • Well... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:33AM (#9443095)
      Linux kernel 2.6.7 just came out so... :-)

    • Re:So (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ultrabot ( 200914 )
      Does this mean they actually have developers? Or did they just up the product version number?

      We'll never know. It's not like anyone is going to *buy* these products.

      Imagine the frustration their developers feel when they put out these products. I can picture an atmosphere of laconic, sarcastic apathy regarding the theoretical users (not that this wouldn't apply to many legitimate sw companies as well ;-)

      These products were probably roadmapped before hitting rock bottom was inevitable, and the managemen

      • Re:So (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Saeed al-Sahaf ( 665390 )
        Imagine the frustration their developers feel when they put out these products. I can picture an atmosphere of laconic, sarcastic apathy regarding the theoretical users (not that this wouldn't apply to many legitimate sw companies as well...

        My guess is that SCO does not employ developers, and that product "updates" come from some sweat shop in India.

    • Re:So (Score:5, Funny)

      by ajrs ( 186276 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:42AM (#9443186) Homepage
      No, they just upgraded the GPL software they ship with their old stuf

  • From the book... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:19AM (#9442896)
    ...of How to Run a Successful Business for Dummies...

    Rule #1: Don't sue your own customers!

    I mean it's that simple

  • SCO's new product... (Score:5, Funny)

    by jadenyk ( 764614 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:20AM (#9442899)
    A new kind of lawsuit.

  • Time to close the shop (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SIGALRM ( 784769 ) * on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:20AM (#9442902) Journal
    "We're looking at this long term, and we see value that we can provide to our customers now and in the future," said Marc Modersitzki, a SCO spokesman. "Not only do we have a road map, but we're delivering on the road map."

    It's obvious SCO's "roadmap" is less product-oriented than legal. But you have to wonder, why they would invest any resources in an aggressive marketing plan when their PR quotient is so incredibly low--much like their recent financials.

    They are not the "vibrant, leading UNIX vendor to regain market share lost to Windows"... that would be like the US sending troops to Vietnam to "regain Hanoi". War over. Done deal. Time to close shop, SCO.

    • Re:Time to close the shop (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dinodrac ( 247713 ) <jrollysonNO@SPAM2mbit.com> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:36AM (#9443129) Homepage
      Perhaps their real concern is that if the courts see them without any real products, then they are even less likely to take them seriously. As it stands, their entire buisness model revolves around half-baked lawsuits - not a good impression to present to the court.

      Regardless, as SIGALRM stated above, its a moot point, without a continued inflow of support from the anti-Linux camps, SCO is dead.
      • Perhaps their real concern is that if the courts see them without any real products, then they are even less likely to take them seriously.

        SCO's final product is themself. Look at who they appointed as CFO: Bert Young. Anyone involved with marchFIRST should recognize that name.

        From SCO's recent conference call, as listed on Groklaw:
        "Bert brings to SCO a seasoned background in executive level management responsibilities from a variety of information technology companies, including worldwide finance operat

  • And a brand new ... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Nom du Keyboard ( 633989 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:20AM (#9442911)
    ...and a brand new lawsuit strategy. Sue everyone with computers! After all, just because they haven't used Linux yet doesn't mean they won't someday.

    Hey, it has worked for Direct TV and smart card programmers.

  • Conincidence? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:20AM (#9442917)
    1. SCO announces new products.
    2. Linus announces new kernel updates.

    So that FedEx package with CD-ROMs from "anonymous insider" finally arrived at OSDL?

  • article (Score:4, Informative)

    by Murf_E ( 754550 ) <`moc.liamtoh' `ta' `reggeyarrum'> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:22AM (#9442937)
    SCO Announces Broad Array of New Unix Products, Channel Support and Training Programs

    LINDON, Utah, Jun 15, 2004 /PRNewswire-FirstCall via COMTEX/ -- The SCO Group, Inc. ("SCO") (Nasdaq: SCOX), the owner of the UNIX(R) operating system and a leading provider of UNIX-based solutions, today announced a broad array of new and enhanced UNIX products as well as new channel support and training programs. The upcoming product releases mark the largest across-the-board group of product enhancements from SCO in several years. New or enhanced UNIX products from SCO and their expected availability dates include:

    * UnixWare 7.1.4 (now shipping)

    * Smallfoot embedded UNIX (now shipping)

    * SCOoffice Server 4.1 (July 2004)

    * Vintela Authentication from SCO Release 2.6 (August 2004)

    * Legend -- the code name for the next release of OpenServer
    (1st Quarter 2005)

    * Reseller training and support programs

    UnixWare 7.1.4 -- A major upgrade to the UnixWare product line, 7.1.4 includes many enhancements that continue to keep UnixWare as the most reliable, stable, scalable and affordable operating system in its class. UnixWare 7.1.4 adds support to enable UnixWare to run thousands of Java and Web Services applications.

    SCOoffice Server 4.1 -- SCOoffice Server 4.1 is a reliable, full-featured Internet e-mail and collaboration solution for small and medium businesses. SCOoffice Server stops e-mail viruses, filters out junk e-mail, and secures e-mail access. Providing more than just e-mail services, SCOoffice Server also delivers a real-time collaboration solution for scheduling group meetings, sharing contact lists and folders, and managing group task lists. SCOoffice Server integrates with Microsoft(R) Outlook(R) and industry-standard e-mail readers and Web browsers.

    Smallfoot -- SCO's formal entry into the embedded UNIX market, Smallfoot consists of a toolkit that is used to create the Smallfoot embedded UNIX operating system. The toolkit is a rapid development tool that allows organizations to create a small software footprint operating system (i.e., Smallfoot embedded UNIX) customized for a variety of applications including Point of Sale, gaming, hand-held and a variety of other devices.

    Vintela Authentication from SCO Release 2.6 -- Vintela Authentication from SCO (VAS) is the company's offering for managing a single user identity across a heterogeneous UNIX and Windows(R) environment. VAS uses Kerberos encryption to protect sensitive user credentials, providing network and user security. Release 2.6 will include additional MMC snap-ins, cross-forest authentication, and much more.

    Legend -- code-name for the next release of OpenServer -- due to ship in the 1st quarter of 2005. This development effort is the first step for SCO in supporting a single UNIX development path for both OpenServer and UnixWare. It enables us to continue to support the 32-bit Intel architecture while adding support for 64-bit advanced computing. The benefit to our customers is enhanced support for 1,000s of applications written for UNIX, Java, and the ability to connect them with Web Services. Legend continues our commitment to value, security and reliability.

    "Customers value the proven reliability and security of SCO UnixWare and SCO OpenServer running on pervasive Intel and AMD hardware," said Jeff Hunsaker, Senior Vice President and General Manager, SCO's UNIX division. "Through today's announcements, SCO is demonstrating our long-term commitment to UNIX customers by providing significant upgrades to our flagship UNIX products. In addition, SCO is providing solutions that enhance our UNIX offerings with updates to SCOoffice Server and Vintela Authentication."

    Along with new product offerings, SCO today announced several new programs for its strong UNIX reseller organization. These training and marketing programs will provide SCO resellers with the expertise and support to ensure thei

  • Wondering... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by JoeShmoe950 ( 605274 ) <CrazyNorman@gmail.com> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:22AM (#9442939) Homepage
    Who actually uses SCO Unixware. I mean, usually any business that wants unix will go with Linux, and in some cases AIX, etc. But who actually uses SCO Unixware, besides SCO (oops, forgot that they were running Linux...)

    • Re:Wondering... (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Who actually uses SCO Unixware

      You do. Many US telephone switches include a copy of UnixWare. You can figure out why given the history of Bell and Unix. The cabin controls on a Boeing 777 also used to be on a system running UnixWare although I don't know if they still are.

      OpenServer is way more successful. It was used by Pizza Hut, Taco Bell and KFC and IIRC MacDonalds (SCO did really well in replicated site installs as these were called).

  • Mega hurt? (Score:5, Funny)

    by stecoop ( 759508 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:23AM (#9442941) Journal
    Funny. When I went to read this article. The Add at the top of the page shows a shirless (maybe naked) guy setting behind a desk with the flashing caption Megahertz. I believe its an omen of what its like to work at SCO.
  • I mean, it's easy to bash someone. Read the critique from the article:
    The continuing efforts to produce a new-product road map less than a year after the last one is an indication that the marketplace is confused by the company and its strategy, said Dan Kusnetzky, an analyst at IDC. "They're seeing that people don't know who they are, and if they don't know who they are, they're not buying from them," he said. The company continues to do a lackluster job in creating brand awareness, and it hasn't been able to create a pull to its products for potential customers, he said. "This is the same conversation that has recurred since the former Santa Cruz Operation [the company's original name] and Caldera [after the merger in 2000] and now SCO."
    Isn't is just fair to say that the old strategy wasn't working (as evidenced by the 20% drop in revenue), so they're trying something new? That's what they say -- they're coming out with new products to try and be more competitive...
    UnixWare 7.1.4 and the new Smallfoot embedded Unix products are shipping now, while SCOoffice Server 4.1 will ship next month and Vintela Authentication From SCO Release 2.6 will be available in August.

  • Yeah really.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by afidel ( 530433 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:24AM (#9442951)
    I interview earlier this year for a position with a large national autoparts chain, while talking about their systems they mentioned that a large amount of their legacy stuff was dialup to UnixWare servers. I asked them what their feelings were re: the longterm viability of SCO and what their contingency plans were if SCO were to fold. They basically said that they had been thinking of moving to Linux but had made no actual moves towards doing so and that they felt that even if SCO folded that someone else would buy the IP and continue the license. I responded that I doubted whoever bought the IP would continue to offer UnixWare but would rather buy it to be able to controll their own Unix product entirely and would drop UnixWare. They didn't seem too pleased with that assesment. Maybe that's why I didn't get the job but I would rather not have been hired on and then asked to clean up the mess in the future!

    • Re:Yeah really.... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Zathrus ( 232140 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:59AM (#9443356) Homepage
      I responded that I doubted whoever bought the IP would continue to offer UnixWare but would rather buy it to be able to controll their own Unix product entirely and would drop UnixWare. They didn't seem too pleased with that assesment.

      Probably because your assesment showed a lack of knowledge about the size of UnixWare's deployment.

      UnixWare (and OpenServer) licensing represents >$40M of revenue. You think anyone who buys it is just going to kiss that goodbye? Hell no. Anyone with a clue will buy it and then promptly offer a transition program over a course of 2-5 years for existing customers.

      Yeah, in a decade UnixWare may only be running on a few systems without support (and perhaps a lot of systems still with support -- if all you have to do is employ a half dozen employees for tech support and patches, and you have customer willing to pay you $1M/year for that, hey... a 50%+ profit margin isn't bad), but it's not like they're going to vanish overnight. Nor will product support. There will be a transitional phase, just like there is for any product where the vendor didn't simply go Chapter 7/11 and nobody bought the remains.

      Realistically we know that there is no value to the SCO source. UnixWare and OpenServer are both archaic by modern standards, not to mention buggy. So why would anyone buy the products except to get the existing user base? And if you get the user base, what freaking good does it do you to then tell them to bend over and enjoy the ride?

      • Re:Yeah really.... (Score:3, Informative)

        by dmaxwell ( 43234 )
        UnixWare (and OpenServer) licensing represents >$40M of revenue. You think anyone who buys it is just going to kiss that goodbye? Hell no. Anyone with a clue will buy it and then promptly offer a transition program over a course of 2-5 years for existing customers.

        The inability to do just that is what makes these products consistent losers for whoever owns them. Most of these things are being used to run POS systems or other transactional networks. Regardless of whether or not the underlying product

  • What this really is... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by nabil_IQ ( 733734 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:24AM (#9442953) Homepage
    it's called "PUMP" ... the "DUMP" coming soon to a stocks market near you.

    • Re:What this really is... (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Check the insider trading history -- the dump is over. The only goal now is to appear to be legit so that they can avoid investigation.

  • SCO makes software? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by CharAznable ( 702598 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:24AM (#9442957)
    With all this fuss, it's easy to forget that SCO was orginally a software company.
    Their warnings are right on the money, though. Who the hell is going to want to do business with them now? It's probably not far fetched to assume that there aren't many new SCO installations anywhere, and that the installed base is only grudgingly still doing business with them.

  • well... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:26AM (#9442985)
    it just makes sense that point of sale devices use a p.o.s. operating system right ?

  • Money back guarantee (Score:5, Funny)

    by beef3k ( 551086 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:27AM (#9443001)
    Missing footnote:

    "Due to our current ongoing lawsuits (which, admittedly, we're not so sure was a good idea in the first place anymore) SCO can only offer a limited money back guarantee of 3 days from the intial purchase date at this time.

    See you in hell,
    --
    Darl"
  • Next they'll probably buy ownership of the license for dosemu [dosemu.org] which means they practically own MS-DOS which means they own the IP for Windows 9x which has a similar GUI as Windows NT based versions.... so technically they own Windows. Maybe they'll sue Microsoft and win this time.

  • lol... I've seen these at staples (Score:3, Funny)

    by enrico_suave ( 179651 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:28AM (#9443032) Homepage
    new DIY Baseless Litigation kits by SCO in the legal form section =)

    e.

  • Updates to what? (Score:3, Funny)

    by TheLinuxWarrior ( 240496 ) <aaron.carr@nospam.aaroncarr.com> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:29AM (#9443043)
    SCO LawSuit 2.0???

    erm...No thanks. I'd rather poke my eyeballs out with rusty paperclips.

  • I am sure they have people beating down the door (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Pengo ( 28814 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:30AM (#9443048) Journal

    I mean, come on.. anyone .. I mean anyone... who even considers using their products, and hasn't moved already to another platform, they need to get their heads examined.

    I am sure their product resellers are -pissed- and have already been working to find other distribution contracts from companies such as Novell or RH. Honestly, I think that this is a simple stunt to try and bubble their stock a bit because of the reality of 0 value on the litigation business to shareholders.

    I can't imagine that anyone of real talent would want to work for SCO at this point on the engineering side.

  • Best Quote Ever (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Murf_E ( 754550 ) <`moc.liamtoh' `ta' `reggeyarrum'> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:30AM (#9443052)
    From a UNIX teacher at my college "SCO's main product right now is litigation"

  • Any reason? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by coolsva ( 786215 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:31AM (#9443062)
    Is it conceivable that SCO is coming up with new product lines in case the judge says they do not have an IP case since they do not have any product that can use the IP.
    Reading the release, it doesn't look like these announcements are major in any way, just run of the mill upgrades or versions that possibly have very few (if any) takers.
    Not sure companies would want to do (new)business with such litigious companies.

  • One definitely true assertion... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by grunt107 ( 739510 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:31AM (#9443066)
    in the article is that SCO is interested in being an IP company and not a products company. That would be somewhat OK is they had clear rights to any IP, but only as a static company. No one will buy new products from a company that is focused on what they DID and not what they can DO. Would you buy a 'new' vehicle that was actually a remade 1978 Chevy Monza with the same 1970s technology?

  • UnixWare (Score:5, Informative)

    by Hornsby ( 63501 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:31AM (#9443069) Homepage
    To me, UnixWare is like a horrible car accident. I don't want to look because I know it's going to be bad, but the perverted side of me just can't resist. Anyway, here's an OSNews review of a recent release of UnixWare (just in case you have a kinky side).

    UnixWare 7.1.3 Review [osnews.com]

  • Who'd a thunk it? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Weaselmancer ( 533834 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:33AM (#9443088)

    Oddly enough, the article states that 'SCO's continuing Unix intellectual property lawsuits against IBM, Novell and others is apparently putting customers off.'

    Well, whaddya know? Actions do have consequences, after all!

    Weaselmancer

  • [OT] The SCO Website (Score:3, Interesting)

    by abertoll ( 460221 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:33AM (#9443091) Homepage Journal
    I just went to the SCO website to see what they were advertising, and I noticed something...

    Any web designers want to comment on the "turning the picture into grayscale" rollovers?

  • Service & Support (Score:5, Insightful)

    by AviLazar ( 741826 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:37AM (#9443134) Journal
    I wonder if SCO is offering Service & Support in quarterly increments? I don't know if a company wants to pay for five years of Service & Support that might terminate by next year :)

  • Thanks slashdot! (Score:5, Funny)

    by 222 ( 551054 ) <stormseeker@gm[ ].com ['ail' in gap]> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:39AM (#9443147) Homepage
    That headline caused me to shoot coffee out of my nose, you insensitive clods!

  • Product Line? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by TastyWords ( 640141 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:47AM (#9443235)
    Does SCO still consider lawsuits to be part of their ongoing product line?

    After all, they've paid their lawyers, et alia in stock, implying they either believe their stock will go up (highly unlikely) or they'll be bought out to shut them down (more likely).

  • Should I sue SCO or Opera!? (Score:3, Funny)

    by vijaya_chandra ( 618284 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:49AM (#9443248)
    When I clicked on the link pointing to the sco site mentioned in the post, the browser said

    The server's certificate did not match its hostname. Accept?
    www.sco.com

    While I was thinking as to whether or not to accept it wondering about the $699 for my linux system, the browser continued loading the page without any problem even before I accepted it.
    Is it some clever *coding* on SCO's part or a problem with Opera!?

    Now!! Whom should I sue!?!

    (OK!! I'm willing to spare the 699 bucks for the higher returns)

  • SCO's new software releases: (Score:4, Funny)

    by humungusfungus ( 81155 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:49AM (#9443251)
    Baseless Accusations v1.01
    Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt v9.421 (previously acquired from Microsoft)
    Lack of Evidence v2.2

  • Samba (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LittleLebowskiUrbanA ( 619114 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:51AM (#9443269) Homepage Journal
    Wonder if Samba and nmap are included? Including Samba would be just arrogant after Samba made this statement. [linuxtoday.com] As far as nmap, SCO would be basically inviting a lawsuit after Fyodor said this:

    "SCO Corporation of Lindon, Utah (formerly Caldera) has lately taken to an extortion campaign of demanding license fees from Linux users for code that they themselves knowingly distributed under the terms of the GNU GPL. They have also refused to accept the GPL, claiming that some preposterous theory of theirs makes it invalid (and even unconstitutional)! Meanwhile they have distributed GPL-licensed Nmap in (at least) their "Supplemental Open Source CD". In response to these blatant violations, and in accordance with section 4 of the GPL, we hereby terminate SCO's rights to redistribute any versions of Nmap in any of their products, including (without limitation) OpenLinux, Skunkware, OpenServer, and UNIXWare. We have also stopped supporting the OpenServer and UNIXWare platforms."

    • Re:Samba (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dmaxwell ( 43234 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:51PM (#9443909)
      There seem to be two schools of thought regarding acceptance and compliance with the GPL.

      One school says that public statements rejecting the GPL mean that one doesn't accept it in the legal sense. Making such a statement and then distributing GPL product is automatically violating the GPL. Fyodor seems to belong to this camp.

      The opinion on the matter is actions are the only thing that matter. One could publically diss the GPL as long as the actual obligations regarding the providing of the source and license are respected. This seems to be the Samba Team's position.

      I'll also point out that SCO has done more than publically disparage the GPL. They have asserted that the GPL is null and void several times in a court of law. That is much stronger mojo than mere press conference lip flapping. Fyodor may have a point.

      They may also have imposed conditions the GPL doesn't permit on code distributed from their FTP site. This screws them under either theory of GPL acceptance. IBM for one is hanging them for this in their counterclaims.

      Is anybody here an AL?

  • Suing Your Customers is NOT a Good Business Model (Score:3, Interesting)

    by CodeBuster ( 516420 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:51AM (#9443271)
    Oddly enough, the article states that 'SCO's continuing Unix intellectual property lawsuits against IBM, Novell and others is apparently putting customers off.' I wonder how that could have happened?

    The RIAA and the MPAA would be wise to learn something from the lesson of SCO. Perhaps they will be shrewd enough to do so....let us see.

  • New products won't even matter (Score:3, Interesting)

    by killermookie ( 708026 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:53AM (#9443288) Homepage
    Today's news of SCO's new product line up isn't even enough to help their stock. [yahoo.com]

  • Top 5 reason for Unix over Linux (Score:3, Funny)

    by 0ddity ( 169788 ) <jam1000_77@yahoo.com> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:53AM (#9443296)
    Does anyone find the top five reasons to choose Unix over Linux as listed on the SCO page incredibly funny? Especially item number 5.

    #1 SCO UNIX® is a Proven, Stable and Reliable Platform
    #2 SCO UNIX® is backed by a single, experienced vendor
    #3 SCO UNIX® has a Committed, Well-Defined Roadmap
    #4 SCO UNIX® is Secure
    #5 SCO UNIX® is Legally Unencumbered

  • Any good Karma? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Dark Paladin ( 116525 ) * <jhummel&johnhummel,net> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:56AM (#9443323) Homepage
    I think the problem that SCO will have for many years boils down to:

    Do I want to risk doing business with them?

    If SCO had just gone out after IBM for copyright infringement, fine - I don't think that the average manager would care.

    The problem is that they turned around and sued former customers (not that they had a choice - to sue people they hadn't had relations with might have opened them up to fraud lawsuits. Then again, they could have chosen not to sue at all.)

    As a recent article pointed out, people now thinking about going to SCO must be thinking "If I ever leave them, will they sue me after? Can I afford that?"

    Current Unixware customers will probably stay on, since it's easier and cheaper to do that than not to. But I will find it surprising if they drum up more then a dribble of new business with their karma approaching sub-basement levels.

    In reality, as most people here probably obverve, they've shot themselves in the foot. If they had stuck with IBM, then resolved that, then (assuming they win, which I find rather remote) tried to go after regular Linux users, they might have done very well. And if they lost, well, they'd still have Unixware to sell.

    Now, people are going to look at them like a rabid dog with a broken leg. Even if you want to help it, you're worried about how much damage you'll recieve in the process.

    Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.

  • to dangerous at any price (Score:3, Insightful)

    by fermion ( 181285 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @11:57AM (#9443338) Homepage Journal
    It seems to me that dealing with SCO would be too dangerous. Any product one could buy would result in a greater exposure to a lawsuit from them.

    For instance, if you bought a new or upgraded a system, they would use that purchase as evidence for a lawsuit should you ever choose to migrate to another *nix.

    Likewise, if you bought into their protection scheme you would significantly increase your exposure to lawsuits from all sides. This is not only true because you explicitly agree that SCO is the sole arbitrator of what can and cannot be done with GNU/Linux software, but also because such an agreement may make the use of such software a violation of the GPL. It is really a recursive problem in which you are exposed to lawsuit no matter who wins.

    So, I really can't see anyone doing any business with this company. Ever.

    Of course firms routinely buy software from companies that spy on and attack customers, so this may be the new model of the new economy!

  • Employment opportunities (Score:3, Funny)

    by miltimj ( 605927 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:18PM (#9443562)
    In case you're looking for a job, you can work for a high quality company. Here are some of our openings:

    Accounts Payable Accountant 26 May 2004
    (to many bills, not enough income)
    Senior Software Engineer 13 Jan 2004
    (location: New Delhi, India)
    Inside Sales Manager 09 Jan 2004
    (we don't have Outside Sales Managers because nobody outside our company uses our products)

    View Details Online [sco.com]

  • It comes... the death of SCO (Score:3, Funny)

    by MacBorg ( 740087 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:21PM (#9443598)
    I mean, honestly, who would buy anything from a Slimy Corporate Oriface?

  • Damn. (Score:3, Funny)

    by MachineShedFred ( 621896 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:28PM (#9443675) Journal
    I almost forgot that SCO existed again. Then, you slashdot people had to post another story!

    Can't we just let SCO slip into oblivion? Don't ruin it for me!

  • SCO resellers disapearing quickly.. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by jaclu ( 66513 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @12:54PM (#9443941)
    By coincidence I wisited their homepage yesterday, just to see who actually resells SCO nowadays (the list is impessivly short).

    (Im in the middle of moving a client away from a SCO solution)

    In USA, there where no resellers listed, just corporate HQ, and 2 branchoffices.

    In Germany and UK I belive it was 3, Sweden and Finland one, Africa one, middle-east one (Isreael)

    I didnt check all of them, but those I did check was not actually involved in SCO anymore, when I called them theyy got slightly embarresed to be connected to SCO, and told me that they recomended me to convert to Solaris or RedHat, depending on workload (wich they offered to help me with). They blamed SCO that they where still listed, they had terminated all connections some 4 month and 8 month agp

  • SCO == Microsoft ??? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Lucky Kevin ( 305138 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @01:34PM (#9444306) Homepage
    Check out the article mentioned in the topic upcoming product plans [sco.com].

    Has anyone else tried clicking on the related topics on the right hand side of the page e.g. company profile?

    It takes me straight to Micro$oft's home page!!! What's going on here? I am running FireFox 0.9 on a Mac. I notice that the link switched to is http://http//www.sco.com/company/profile.html. Even stranger, why does this take me to Micro$oft? Is someone at Mozilla playing a joke?

    I'm confused!

  • From their product list ... (Score:3, Funny)

    by kitzilla ( 266382 ) <paperfrog&gmail,com> on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @01:48PM (#9444449) Homepage Journal
    Smallfoot embedded UNIX (now shipping)

    Ah ... that's not a Smallfoot, that's Novell's foot. And we all know where it's embedded.

  • New Product: Linux (Score:3, Funny)

    by ryen ( 684684 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @02:29PM (#9444870)
    this comes questionably close to the release of the 2.6.7 Linux Kernel [slashdot.org].

  • Well, they NEED to update their product... (Score:3, Funny)

    by praedor ( 218403 ) on Wednesday June 16, 2004 @04:47PM (#9446413) Homepage

    Because the current product doesn't include linux kernel code. SCO needed to update their OS so that it includes linux kernel code so they can then claim that linux is STILL violating their IP because, "See? There is still SCO code in even the newest linux kernels!".


    They have to try to maintain their sole source of income of late (stupid companies that cave and pay for their bogus license to run linux).

Slashdot Top Deals

Every program is a part of some other program, and rarely fits.

Close