Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> SCO's clusters crippled by missing 'ING'
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | The poor SCO Group can't get much right these days, including
> | keeping its high availability clusters highly available.
> `----
>
> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/04/sco_no_ha/
We ought to feel a little bit sorry for SCO, I wonder why we don't.
I do wonder though if SCO would be capable of swallowing it's pride holding
up it's hands and saying 'Sorry, we made a mistake, we listened to MS and
ended up to our neck in pig poo'.
Then maybe they could side with Linux, they nearly did it once, they even
had a Linux on their web site for a short period. Presumably that was just
prior to MS secret agents visiting them, pouring out a few glasses of
extreemly strong scrumpy and telling them how kewl it would be to sue IBM.
At one time SCO would have made a good Linux ally, I'm not sure they could
be now, but there is the potential that they still have a lot to offer.
Unfortunately the only one I can think of is detremental to themselves,
helping big users move to Linux.
|
|
