Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 6th Jan 2003 18:00 UTC
SCO, Caldera, Unixware "As much as Linux is pitted against Windows in the popular imagination, Linux has enjoyed perhaps more success supplanting Unix in the enterprise. The SCO Group's SCO Linux 4 (brand-new, despite its enumeration) can provide companies with an effective path to such migrations, particularly at sites that are running SCO's UnixWare." Read the review at eWeek.
Order by: Score:

..and the fact that SCO Linux 4 is a strenghtened (secured) distro, unlike RedHat 8.0, to which the reviewer has likened it.

To be fair, it has been pitched against the RedHat advanced server, too. Does anyone know if RH advanced server is secured, too?

fill in the blanks
by oldgit on Tue 7th Jan 2003 00:59 UTC

... is evil

Open...for a fee
by Steve B. on Tue 7th Jan 2003 02:29 UTC

How is it that by adding a few proprietary chunks of code, an open source distribution created by volunteers all over the world, suddenly becomes subject to licensing restrictions and cannot be freely copied and passed on? Doesn't this go against the grain of what the Linux/GNU community is all about? How are these freeloaders getting away with it and why does the community let them?

I know there are still truly free distributions (Debian springs to mind), but going by the trend that's emerged over the last 18 months, will this always be the case? And if not, what's the motivation to contribute if I can't even get access to the source code without paying some exhorbitant fee (Lindows springs to mind here).

Losing faith rapidly.....

I spent a few days with my colleagues, in december, researching the GPL in this particular regard, and it's completely OK. If you don't like it, tough. It's the GPL.

So this is rubbish then...
by Steve B. on Tue 7th Jan 2003 03:00 UTC

From the GPL Preamble (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html)

"We protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the software."

"Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all"

Still, nice while it lasted...

TOO GREEDY!!!!!!
by emey on Tue 7th Jan 2003 10:49 UTC

SCO Linux just look too restrictive. In my opinion, they will never make it if they keep it this way. How many can tried their product with the restriction like this? Any of you personally willing to pay 599 just for the sake of testing and getting some administrative knowledge? How can you make your top personnel confident on a product that you yourself don't even know the capability?

Among the factor that RedHat remain as the top Linux distro is due to it availability to many and many know how to administer it or tweak it. And at last, can recommend the top management to buy the official version fo business purposes.

bullshit
by mario on Tue 7th Jan 2003 11:56 UTC

how many people can put their hands on RedHat Advanced Server... for free? same difference. does RedHat really need this knee-jerk support from their zealous supporters?


obviously.....


yes

Who is The Real Zealout?
by emey on Tue 7th Jan 2003 13:03 UTC

RedHat is not the best but it can maintain it top position. That is the real issue. The other distro developer/distributor should think why.

When I tried OpenLinux 2.3 long ago, the product is far better than RedHat version at that time in my opinion especially in term of user friendliness and stability. I've tried to get 3.X series but fail to get within my area (not everybody live in US).

However, I can get every version of RedHat easily without waiting for very long time. Of course not the Advanced Server but I can play around (and learned) with the features before deciding on whether recomending (or sell) to others or not.

Since last week I went around software shop without success on getting ScoLinux for my testing. I'm not going to pay the publish price for anything just for testing purposes but I will when I satisfied with it.

So can anybody point out to me where can I get a trial copy at a reasonable pricing?

AND SOMEBODY UP THERE PLEASE BE NOTED, IT IS NOT ABOUT ZEALOUT HERE BUT THE MARKETING STRATEGY Do you think every windows user in the world know how to use Windows from the original copies? If yes, it is the real bullllsheeiiiiit!

People should read the GPL...
by Cesar Cardoso on Tue 7th Jan 2003 13:48 UTC

GPL doesn't prohibits RedHat from making available only the source of RedHat Advanced Server, or making SCO from putting the SuSE's proprietary installer on their product (OK, ask RMS what he thinks about SuSE, but that's another post).

You can get the RHAS source and compile it, you can get SCO Linux binaries, blend your own installer and make your SCO-powered-by-yourself Linux.

Now, stop ranting and start commenting...

In its former incarnation of Caldera, SCO was a strong proponent of Webmin; it's no surprise that they use it instead of YAST. It's also no surprise that Webmin isn't suitable for some tasks like X screen resizing, it's a limitation of the Web format. Anyway, Webmin is great.

you could have donloaded the ISO images of 2.4, 3.0 and 3.1 (called Caldera e-Desktop). It was all available as a free download. Of course, you couldn't know it, the RedHat FUD was too loud.

some links of interest
by mario on Wed 8th Jan 2003 03:51 UTC

ftp://ftp.caldera.com/pub/
http://www.caldera.com/products/workstation/ "OpenLinux Workstation ISO images (CD-ROM images) are available. Download Now."

and finally, a direct link, on Caldera's FTP server, to the Caldera Openlinux Workstation 3.1.1 ISO images:

ftp://ftp.iso.caldera.com/pub/OpenLinux/3.1.1/Workstation/

Re: Mr Mario
by emey on Wed 8th Jan 2003 04:09 UTC

You seem doesn't understand my message!!! I don't need OpendLinux anymore. It is outdated!!! That why I said SCO is TOO GREEDY!!!. They don't even provide any trial version of their ScoLinux 4 (maybe I don't know where can I get -that's why I ask) but just give link to the outdated Caldera version and some SRPMS. (Read the 4th paragraph above - Who is The Real Zealout?)

Giving the link to OpenLinux iso (which I already know the link because I'm among the one that keep on geoing back to Caldera (now SCO) site to see if there are any new version) is useless. And the thread also about SCOLinux 4 not OpenLinux bla.. bla.. bla....

Do you think people will go and test the outdated OpenLinux or write review on it? Or recommend SCOLinux 4 to others base on the OpenLinux 3.1.1 content? Be realistic maaaan

It's not useless
by mario on Wed 8th Jan 2003 05:17 UTC

because it counters your argument that this was SCO's business policy all the time. I forced you to retract and say that this actually wasn't their policy all the time till now.

So they're doing with SCO Linux 4.0 exactly the same RedHat is doing with RedHat advanced server. Do you think you can recommend RedHat advanced server based on RedHat Linux 8.0?

I think I am being realistic, very realistic: I am pointing out that Caldera is doing nothing different from Redhat. What do you think about that?

GPL
by Tyr on Wed 8th Jan 2003 06:02 UTC

There seems to be a lot of confusion here about the gpl and free as beer vs. speech. Maybe it's time someone did an editorial about this (if only to stop the whiners) ?

Re: It's not useless
by emey on Wed 8th Jan 2003 11:07 UTC

Here I can get RedHat Advanced Server easily at reasonable price for testing. Although I'm one of GPL supporter, I don't mind if those company making profit by bundling GPL software and other license software together with their support. But they should also considered how to attract potential user, at least give chance by provide limited licence for trial version. Did they expect somebody will pay 599 for something that they don't know? This strategy will only suitable for existing customer and if those OpenLinux is TOO GOOD why must they move to SCO Linux.

And comparing RH8 and Redhat Advanced Server with OpenLinux 3.x and SCO Linux just doesn't make any sense at all. Do you think when say something good about something means he/she like that thing? Is its by saying Windows conquer most of the world OS mean the person like Windows? Open your eyes and mind please, it is reality that RedHat still at the top position of Linux distros.

For me I have to use RH although I'm not favouring it (especially on KDE part) because I just can make my job done with it whereas the others I've tried fail to meet my need. I like Debian most but it is not up to date as I want and I can't recommend to others something that will take their time for migration.

Honestly, I also use to run my custom made Linux but now I got no time to upgrade it. It is OK for my usage but not for others. And if SCO Linux 4 is proven good and far better that others, I don't mind promoting it to others.