McNealy: "Don't touch" Linux without legal guarantees

infoconomy ^ | 31 July 2003 | Dominic Tonner

[WestPacSailor]

groovy. thanks

[TechJunkYard]

Telnet is so unsecure. Use SSH.

[Golden Eagle]

Linux is free, it is not illegal, and Linus Torvald is not a Communist. Do you have any facts to support your case, or just more smears?

Well there's a trial going on right now to determine the legality of linux, and Torvalds daddy was an outspoken communist. Based on the son's 'community' based products, he sure looks like one himself. Got any proof he's not?

If you have a great product in the present, tnen the free market will pay you in the present. Apparently, with respect to Sun, the free market is not doing that.

They've sold about $10 Billion in product in the last year, about twice as much as people were willing to spend on all versions of Linux.

Yeah, it's free.

It has been, which is the main reason anybody uses it. But I doubt it will be for much longer. What will you use then?

[Bush2000]

Although B2000 poo-poos it, this lawsuit is a loser in part because it has attracted a huge community of interest in seeing it lose.

Your interest is inconsequential to the outcome of the case.

Contrast that with Microsoft's anti-trust travails. I think THAT was junk litigation, too, but nobody was doing pro bono work for M$.

True. You and your kind are doing pro-boner work for Torvalds.

[Bush2000]

Well, now we see where you get your IT perspective.

What's this "we" stuff, Sybil? And wrong, you don't "see" jack. You haven't been working in the industry long enough to "see" and "understand" the issues affecting most enterprises. You guys equate shiny and brand new with efficient. Laughable.

Anything that runs as efficiently as an HMO is a dandy IT success!

As if you'd know: I'd bet dollars to doughnuts you've never worked for one.

Yessiree Bob, nothing like rancid old mainframes with multi-million-dollar operating costs to keep the IT drones' salaries from looking too large.

Multi-million-dollar operating costs? Are you smoking crack?!? These machines require almost no maintenance at all. They've been running since before you were crapping your diapers, Linux FanBoy.

[bvw]

In your company were you the authority that gave the reccommendation to go along with SCO's claim, if you had any systems it claims against? Were you the authority that gave the reccommendation to not use Linux?

The sole authority, or part of committee?

Have you also advised against, or set a policy against using open-source products such as Perl?

[eno_]

The extremely high operating costs of mainframes come from the extremely high recurring licensing and maintenence contract costs. It is not credible you do not know this. A mainframe that "hums along" needing no attention still costs a king's ransom to run because the hardware and software vendors all want a big monthly, quarterly, or annual "software lease," "upgrade plan," or "maintenence" fee. And as it becomes apperent which customers they have their hooks in, the vendors jack up those fees.

Computer Associates whole business model is based on acquiring past-their-prime software companies and jacking up maintenence fees on their long-term customers.

And, on top of it all, are you actually serious that anyone thinks HMOs run efficiently? Does anyone who has dealt with insurance companies think they can find their IT ass with both hands?

[eno_]

Sun, by the way, just cut a deal to sell SuSE Linux. That and Java will be all they have left.

[Bush2000]

The extremely high operating costs of mainframes come from the extremely high recurring licensing and maintenence contract costs.

The costs are not "extremely high"; primarily because they negotiated longterm contracts. Sure, if you go year-by-year, the costs can be high. But these guys know that their architectures aren't going to change, so they can commit to a decade-long contract.

[eno_]

Good grief! A decade-long contract? I'd give my right arm to have customers as stupid as that.

[Bush2000]

Good grief! A decade-long contract? I'd give my right arm to have customers as stupid as that.

You don't seem to grasp this fact: This hardware has been running for 25 years. It has all the storage it requires and serves their needs well. They have investigated alternatives but, in each case, they calculated that the cost of porting applications and data greatly exceeded the cost of their existing license. So they're sticking with it. And BTW, the contract is void if they decide to upgrade to another hardware/software solution from IBM (some of which have perpetual licensing terms).