Linked by Eugenia Loli on Fri 23rd Dec 2005 08:50 UTC
SCO, Caldera, Unixware The SCO Group's revenue continued to fall in the fourth quarter and during fiscal 2005, as Unix sales slumped. Management, however, tried to put a positive spin on the results, released after Thursday's market close, saying that cost-cutting measures have made SCO's Unix business profitable again and adding that plenty of cash remains to continue a legal battle against IBM.
Thread beginning with comment 77728
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Dark Leth
Member since:
2005-07-06

You seem to have a weak understanding of the law. There is no basis, currently, for McBride to be prosecuted under. Are his actions ethical? Not likely. Are they legal? Yes, he has every right under the current judicial system to sue as long as the courts believe he has a case. Currently, they do.

Beyond that, are you even familiar with any of SCO's products? Their Unix suites are still some of the best around, and the quality of their insulary projects is supurb.

I'm no SCO apologist, trust me, from a business standpoint I saw this vapour suit as a big problem. However, I think you need a better basis for your attacks, as well as understand the SCO is not some company just throwing around lawsuits. They are trying to protect their market.

Please, before you mod me down, actually read what I have said. I am on Linux's side here, however, SCO has every right to sue. They just shouldn't win.

Reply Parent Score: 2

skx2 Member since:
2005-07-06

I'm not one of those who start screaming "sue them" at every opportunity like so many seem to do. But it does seem to me that McBride has made some very public accusations of infringed code in the press.

If the code doesnt come out later in trial doesn't that mean he made knowingly false statements? And duped investors who were paying for the trial? So they should have some recourse?

As for your latter statements about SCOs products I'm just going to have to go with my experience. I use Solaris, Windows, and Linux in production. SCO Unixware, and SCO OpenServer are *nasty* environments to use and support.

The hardware support is horrible, their systems are non-standard in suprising ways. (Yes I realise most of the major Unix vendors do funny things - but SCO is symlink hell as far as I'm concerned. eg even /etc/passwd is a symlink to the real file!)

Some SCO systems I've seen stand up for long periods of time, but much more often they seem to suffer under load with crashing. Of course that could just be my setup, and my poor administration - but I've heard similar stories from local people who I trust and recognise as being competant.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Member since:

They are trying to protect their market.

My suggestion to them, far too late to do any good now, would be to stop trying so hard since they are killing the business and driving away customers by suing their own end users as well as IBM. Besides they have been losing money for 7 years now, they don't have much market left.

The problem with them [theoretically] taking my advice is that the counterclaims won't go away even if they drop their lawsuits.

Reply Parent Score: 0

chemical_scum Member since:
2005-11-02

They are trying to protect their market.

No this is where you are wrong. SCO is not SCO, it is in fact Caldera which was a Linux company (My first Linux distro was Caldera OpenLinux 2.2) that was a spin off from Novell. Caldera bought the SCO Unix business from Tarentella while Ransom Love was CEO. They announced that they were going to integrate Linux and Unix. Caldera at that time was one of the key sponsors of the United Linux consortium.

When Ransom Love abruptly left and Darryl McBride (with a history of litigation) was brought in as CEO the company changed its name to the SCO Group. They then started their campaign of litigation against IBM and others. This campaign serves two purposes:

1. It is a pump and dump scheme aimed at making a lot of money for certain people.

2. It is a FUD campaign against Linux financed by MS and Sun's purchase of Unix "licenses" from SCOG and also by the MS backed venture capital financing which turned sour when the dirty details behind it became public.

The litigation has proved counter-productive to SCOG's Unix market share, firstly the case against IBM and the loudmouthed public campaign of lies and FUD against Linux caused a lot of ill will amongst knowledgeable IT professionals who were now prejudiced against buying the SCO Unix product. Finally by sueing their former customers DaimlerChrysler and AutoZone they created further prejudice against buying SCO Unix, as what sane company is going to buy a product from a company that sues its own customers.

Edited 2005-12-24 03:20

Reply Parent Score: 2