Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 23rd Mar 2007 17:50 UTC, submitted by Charles A Landemaine
Thread beginning with comment 224269
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 22:15 UTC, submitted by Tom
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 17:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 13:17 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/16/13 12:06 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-07-06
True, but Solaris (formerly sunOS) harkens back well before Linux was a twinkle in Linus' eye, and when everyone still thought of Stallman as 'that nutjob who wants to give it all away' assuming they even heard of him instead of the psuedo-religious messiah he is now...
Hmm, if you look at Sun's history, they've never taken on GNU or Stallman, many of the times Sun employees were running Linux before it became 'in vogue' by the 'five minute fanboys', porting GNU software to Solaris, and had embraced openstandards long before Microsoft started ramming their crap through committes with $100 notes attached to them.
Just because Sun weren't jumping out of isles at the 'church of gnu' didn't mean that they weren't doing 'opensource' stuff in their own way - you need to realise that the way a company can interact with the marketplace is completely different to the way Stallman does - everything a person at Sun says might and can be interpeted and might impact on their share price and bottom line - unlike Sun, Stallman doesn't have to worry about such things, he can rant and rave, and it won't make a lick of difference.
Edited 2007-03-24 11:31