What is Digg?Sponsored by newegg
Ready. Set. Shop view!
newegg.com - Newegg.com Black Friday Sale starting 11/25 3PM PST. No Lines, No Crowds, Click and Save.
56 Comments
- spritom, on 10/19/2009, -1/+37How's that strategy workin' for ya' Darl?
- alphacoder, on 10/19/2009, -0/+22From my following of the case off and on over the years, it would seem that McBride wasn't the only person at SCO determined to litigate and pursue such policies.
It really does seem like this is just smoke and mirrors as one of the last ditch efforts by SCO to at the least remove a lightning rod but keep most of their substance. At least that's my understanding since McBride had tons of support from people up and down the SCO organization hierarchy. - nxusername, on 10/19/2009, -0/+20The amount of incompetence at the top level of multi-million dollar corporations is baffling isn't it? I always wanted to start my own business - but I feared I may too smart to succeed.
The sad thing is that there was a strong market for SCO Unix prior to the lawsuits. Many integrated systems used SCO Unix as their development platform. When they quit investing in their products and went after IBM most of their 3rd party partners jumped ship to Linux.
Business Model FAIL! - 4DFX, on 10/19/2009, -0/+19Don't let the door hit you on the way out!
- ThsGuyRightHere, on 10/19/2009, -0/+18Better late than never I suppose.
- blitzwing85, on 10/20/2009, -1/+19Wait, SCO is still around?!
- kingmanic, on 10/20/2009, -0/+17On the one hand SCO and McBride were a huge pain int he ass for corporations and entities that used linux. On the other hand their incompetent and toothless challenge has legitimized Linux and clarified it's legal standing. While their motivations were greed and there methods corrupt the end result was positive for Linux users. In a way the future of linux was made much less complicated by these clowns.
- snotrokit, on 10/20/2009, -0/+8watermelon is right. Darl made out like a bandit for the last 6 or so years. Granted he ran SCO into the ground, and cost millions to others and is forever the complete ASS of oh so many jokes, but he is loaded.
- Heywoodj, on 10/19/2009, -3/+11Call me when they cut off his hands and nail them to the front door of IBM HQ.
We should thank Big Blue for drowning this kitten for us. - lolwatermelon, on 10/20/2009, -1/+9His tens of millions of dollars think it worked fairly well for him.
- thrill, on 10/20/2009, -0/+7$5 says Darl will file suit against SCO.. and lose. heh..
- inactive, on 10/20/2009, -2/+9KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!
Talking about SCO actually... - reticulate, on 10/20/2009, -0/+6They're just IP trolls at this point I think.
Edit: IP, not patent. I need more coffee. - shadowman99, on 10/20/2009, -0/+6Years and years ago you may have been dealing with "old SCO" or "Santa Cruise Operation". They were a bunch of old Unix hippies and they sold the company. "New SCO" or "The SCO Group" is a bunch of patent chasers and lawsuit zombies.
Old SCO good, new SCO bad. - doctechnical, on 10/20/2009, -1/+7Apologies in advance if I'm asking a stupid question, but does SCO actually have any assets worth speaking of? Years and years ago I was on a project that ran on SCO Unix, that was before Linux and before SCO turned into a hive of dicks.
- HamNCheese, on 10/20/2009, -0/+6***** SCO
- theghoul, on 10/20/2009, -1/+6I wonder if Microsoft wants their money back?
- doctechnical, on 10/20/2009, -0/+4Yes, it was definitely the Santa Cruise Operation. Thanks for the info.
- snotrokit, on 10/20/2009, -1/+5PJ will be so pleased.
- mediatrips, on 10/20/2009, -0/+4Another interesting departure ...
Dan Glickman Leaving MPAA ... Dan Glickman, chairman and CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America, will be stepping down from his position when his contract expires in September 2010. Glickman does not have any plans regarding what he’ll do just yet. - ImpicuS, on 10/20/2009, -0/+4Finally.
- JohnnySoftware, on 10/20/2009, -1/+5It seemed like he and his brother were in charge of the company. He was not some PR person hired as a company spokesman nor some low level manager pushed out in front to put a face on the company.
Plus, his brother was the lawyer doing the litigation as I recall.
Further, the investors they hooked up with to pump cash into SCO clearly had a vested interest in SCO dragging the targeted companies & organizations into court. Had SCO gone up different avenues for financing and/or remained focussed on product R&D and ongoing support of their existing product, things might have gone very, very differently.
It really looked like this was their primary preferred course of action, not a fallback on a fallback. They stuck with this longer than anything and it seemed all along the way to do harm to both SCO and those it sued both. When something like that happens and goes on for so long, you have to ask what is driving it.
It seemed like it was Darl and the investors when you piece together what was going on, who was benefiting from what, and how doggedly they stuck to it.
This reorganization might be the one thing that allows SCO to pick a new direction and start flexing its creative muscles again, instead of the destructive ones.
If you want to analyze the past, go back and look at what he said in interviews and press conferences. Look at who owned the company. Look at who invested in the company. I would be leery about fitting an off the shelf explanation on the history of SCO based on a recent event without first actually looking at the history of SCO. - slartybardfast, on 10/20/2009, -1/+4...and he will finally reveal that the Linux code that is copied from Unix is:
#include <stdio.h> - NickF123, on 10/20/2009, -0/+3It's more than suspected
- secrity, on 10/20/2009, -0/+3A lot of them have been migrating off of SCO.
- KeithLM, on 10/20/2009, -0/+3Plenty of details right there in the beginning of the article:
"The decision to fire the controversial CEO is part of a restructuring plan that is based on recommendations made by the Chapter 11 trustee who was assigned to SCO by the justice department." - AndrewMoyer, on 10/20/2009, -2/+5Darl McBride's next move: Sue SCO for ...?
- JTMON, on 10/20/2009, -1/+4They ought to now sue Darl personally for libel and or slander since he's still spouting misinformation after the court case. Actually, ***** it, grieve his stupid ass and try and get him disbarred. He can go the Jack Thompson way.
- NickF123, on 10/20/2009, -1/+3I'll miss you, Darth McBride
- JTMON, on 10/20/2009, -0/+2You can remain afloat under bankruptcy, reorganize and come back. It all depends on the type you file for.
- JohnnySoftware, on 10/20/2009, -2/+4Many companies owned Unix licenses and had for a long time. Since before the SCO-Novell deal ever existed.
SCO also took stabs at Linux too. They pursed a 2-prong legal+PR attack on both Unix and Linux. - asaone, on 10/21/2009, -0/+2This guy should be in jail for trying to extort monies from everyone who uses Linux or UNIX, and Microsoft should be fined a few hundred billion for covertly supporting this idiot and his efforts.
- rdizzle, on 10/20/2009, -1/+3SCO? Who is SCO? I thought they went the way of the DODO?
- greenmacaw, on 10/20/2009, -0/+2Wasn't is suspected that SCO had received a large amount of financing from Microsoft to begin its attack on the Linux community?
- secrity, on 10/20/2009, -0/+2 In chapter 11
- Quaterni0n, on 10/20/2009, -1/+2SCO is still alive? How are those ***** still clinging on to dear life?
- IphtashuFitz, on 10/20/2009, -0/+1You likely do if you ever go shopping at stores that use electronic cash registers. Companies like Costco, Shaws, Sears, KMart, JC Penney, etc. all use point-of-sale systems built on SCO technologies. SCO has long had a huge presence in the POS market and still provides software for those devices to a huge number of corporate clients.
- rrwest, on 10/21/2009, -0/+1It was through a shell organization that had "nebulous" ties to MS.
Groklaw readers pursued the threads and connected the dots sufficiently to probably warrant an investigation some time in the future.
Just saying... - the7thmagus, on 10/21/2009, -0/+1I came here to make that faulkner reference. dugg.
- canthraxp, on 10/20/2009, -1/+2We need to kill this company, and bury each piece of it in different graves, so it won't come back again.
- zbeast, on 10/20/2009, -2/+3Darl, Darl, Darl, Darl..HaHa..
- thebreach, on 10/20/2009, -1/+2Who cares, SCO stopped being a real business a long time ago. Firing their CEO is like a piece of ***** ridding itself of a corn kernel
- PopcornDave, on 10/20/2009, -0/+1Makes you wonder who would actually want to be employed there too and what it is that they actually would do beyond thinking up litigation targets.
- spritom, on 10/20/2009, -0/+1Here's the infringing code:
http://radar.oreilly.com/FortuneSCOcover2004.jpg - pbgswd, on 10/20/2009, -1/+2ding dong the witch is gone!!!
- secrity, on 10/20/2009, -0/+1I would LOVE to see that happen -- the lawyers would eat up any money either of them have.
- directedition, on 10/20/2009, -1/+2I didn't realize SCO was still afloat. Didn't they file for bankruptcy a while ago?
- craigsbro22, on 10/20/2009, -0/+1we are friends?!?! weird? oh well. cool story bro.
- badqat, on 10/20/2009, -1/+2Yeah, this will sure change the way SCO operates...NOT!
- rrwest, on 10/21/2009, -0/+0Soon, my son, soon...
-
Show 51 - 57 of 57 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 