OT: Microsoft IS STILL SCO

[Andy Green]

taharka wrote:

> On Thu, 2006-11-09 at 11:34 -0500, Mike McCarthy, W1NR wrote:
>> The groklaw article is the very same day after knee jerk reaction that is 

I abandoned Groklaw some years ago and it's good to see folk forming 
their own opinion from diverse sources instead of getting spoonfed.

> My initial reaction also, after reading the groklaw article before any
> others. Now, I'm taking the wait & see route until the jury is in ;-)

Novell put up some blather here

http://www.novell.com/linux/microsoft/faq_opensource.html

But IMO it's hard to mistake the events for anything except strong FUD 
against Linux.  It has the hallmark of thoroughbred FUD, the threat is 
powerful but nebulous, unstated, cannot be engaged with or dissipated, 
can only be inferred, best of all for MSFT it is deniable by the author 
(some time before any MSFT person stops talking in smug riddles when 
asked if RHAT are under any patent gun, I think we will find).  It 
reminds me of the SCO FUD that there was tainted IP in Linux, but 
somehow they ensured there was no way to ever get clean because they 
could never specify what the issue actually was.  And that was because 
the lingering FUD was the whole point.

I always hated Mono since it is only increasing the pool of devs that 
invest in languages controlled by MSFT.  I hope RHAT burn the misguided 
junk.

Novell lost their way after Netware and now they have lost their way 
again.  That helps RHAT, as does the fact that they only attract this 
attention because they have been effective.  And just maybe the recent 
political changes in the US can make any actual (as opposed to 
hinted-at) extermination of MSFT's competition less likely, given the 
different prosecution of the antitrust stuff under the two main parties.

-Andy