SCO v. IBM

Message ID: 120680 Posted By: stats_for_all Posted On: 2004-04-06 12:00:00 Subject: McBride changes story Recs: 22 In 2003, McBride asserted that Linus Torvald never responded to his e-mail. "He says he sent an e-mail to Linus Torvalds, but Torvalds never responded. " I noticed the following statement when reading the CRN award to McBride at: /www.crn.com/sections/special/top25/top25_03.asp?ArticleID=45992 This is contracdicted by the April 1, 2004 McBride interview where Darl himself described the exchange. ------------------------------------------------------------ The text of this Yahoo Message Board post has been licensed for copying and distribution by the Yahoo Message Board user "stats_for_all" under the following license: License:  CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike v2.0 ------------------------------------------------------------

Message ID: 120616 Posted By: jcauseyfd Posted On: 2004-04-06 09:40:00 Subject: New ad blitz??? Recs: 0 Just thought this was interesting and maybe someone else will as well. In yesterday's mail I received a marketing piece from MS about their "Desktop Deployment and Resource Kit". It's a big, slick fold out piece targeted at my industry and extolling the virtues of selecting XP with Office 2003 for a desktop and office solution. As they note, there is "more than _one choice_" for these. Of course, it is full of all their marketing fluff, including not one, but two, obligatory quotes from Gartner about those evil costs of migration and training when switching. The most interesting thing about all this to me is that it was even sent out. I don't remember EVER getting anything trying to sell me on how great their desktop and office solutions are. Servers, Exchange, all that stuff, sure, but a big marketing piece about desktop/office

Message ID: 120536 Posted By: ColonelZen Posted On: 2004-04-05 23:53:00 Subject: 10.50 Wild speculation Recs: 2 Let's try this. SCO itself, other than lining the exec's pockets , doesn't need the 10.50 as the redemption option is theirs. But the skull sweat of others here suggests that someone spent around 4M to push it up there. The only other interested party who would care about the 10.50 is BayStar so why would they? To keep SCO from executing an option they can't afford to execute. Which, (donning tinfoil hat with pink puffball at the crown) might suggest that they think SCO just *might* try a suicide play to extort more money out of them (I. e deliver the redemption note), which 5 days later allows them to declare bankruptcy. Which give rise to three more questions (clear indicator that we've gone beyond what the facts allow us to speculate on, but fun anyway) Why does BS care? Their money's gone anyway. Because it looks bad