SCO Financial Outlook (My Title)

Groklaw ^ | 01/30/04 | Pamela Jones, et al

[Salo]

Long, but interesting since people are starting to see SCO's case as a bad financial investment.

[Salo]

Pinging the Penguin Pinger and other interested parties.

[ShadowAce]

Tech Ping

[Golden Eagle]

So IBM's Groklaw website posted this huh? Doesn't seem to jive with most other financial analysts who are predicting significant rises for SCOX stock:

http://screen.yahoo.com/d?vw=0&db=reports&z=dat&tk=SCOX

[flashbunny]

Gee, financial analysts have done soooo well and are sooo impartial...I'd sooner trust a clinton than a financial analyst recommending SCO as a good investment.

[ShadowAce]

Ya know--I really don't mind you arguing your side of issues. That's what free speech is all about.

However, at least get your facts straight. IBM has nothing to do with the content of Groklaw.

Until you can prove that they do, refrain from posting that. Before you respond--contributions of money do not indicate editorial contributions.

[Golden Eagle]

Well Forbes magazine has an expose where they claim IBM paid for all the servers, so I'd call that a pretty direct correlation.

[ShadowAce]

Again--monetary contributions do NOT constitute editorial constributions.

[Salo]

Actually, the guy who wrote this Dion Cornett, is listed by SCO on their analysts page. :-P

[Salo]

From Forbes: Groklaw is hosted, free, by a non-profit outfit called iBiblio, which runs on $250,000 worth of Linux-based computers donated by IBM and a $2 million donation from a foundation set up by Robert Young, founder of Red Hat.

So IBM did not donate the servers to Groklaw: they were donated to iBiblio which hosts Groklaw and is a science-related site with ties to the University of North Carolina.

[ShadowAce]

I wouldn't expect an answer, if I were you. Once he loses a talking point, he ignores everything after that and goes on to another one.

I know I'm not expecting a response to my posts...

[Salo]

If nothing else, I thought he might appreciate the irony of a SCO-listed analyst saying, basically, "don't do it until they prove something." Wait until the issue of Novell's claim on 95% of SCO's unix revenue is addressed: SCO's stock will end up as low-grade toilet paper. All of the money MS and Sun pumped into SCO might end up financing Novell's purchase of Suse. BTW, that ibiblio site is pretty cool.

[Golden Eagle]

There's an obvious correlation, ignore it if you so choose. Most other unbiased persons will see the link, which was my intent anyway.

[ShadowAce]

Well, if you insist on such "correlations," you'll have to accept the bias inherent in any study that Microsoft commissions--no matter what the outcome or conclusions of said study.

BTW--as Salo correctly pointed out, IBM didn't donate anything to Groklaw, so there is no "correlation."

[Golden Eagle]

so there is no "correlation."

So you're asserting that "Groklaw does not run on servers donated by IBM"? I'm asserting that it does, and if Forbes investigating reporters are correct so am I.

[ShadowAce]

So you're asserting that "Groklaw does not run on servers donated by IBM"?

Now you're just nit-picking. Read my post again for comprehension--IBM did not donate anything to Groklaw.

[Golden Eagle]

I'm not nick picking at all, just correctly pointing out that IBM donated the hardware that is used to run Groklaw. Sorry to hear you're having such a tough time dealing with it.

[js1138]

Again--monetary contributions do NOT constitute editorial constributions.

Oh please. Where were you when the Chinese were contributing to the Clinton campaign? I'm rather neutral in this, but if Microsoft contributed to Groklaw, folks would be screaming.

[DFW_Repub]

Linux is derived from UNIX. Somebody owns that UNIX code. Methinks SCO still has a case.

[ShadowAce]

Wrong. Linux is NOT derived from UNIX. Linux is POSIX-compliant--so is UNIX. Of course they're similar--based on the POSIX compliance alone.