I was trying to run away from this thread but could not :-)
* Curtis Rey;
In regards to Anders, Zentara's and other similar statements. I have reservations about this whole chirade. But moreover, I tend to think A) Zentara has a point - Like the old line from the Godfather. "NEVER LET 'UM KNOW WHAT YOUR THINKING!" Let um sweat. Let them thrash about. Which leads
I would guess IBM is basing its strategy on the following 1) Separate the people from the problem ( read people also as companies ) 2) Focus on interests not on positions 3) Generate a variety of possibilities before deciding what to do 4) Insist that the result be based on some objective standard Such a strategy normally will take a huge amount of time especially item number (3) and taking into consideration that they will need to focus also on their BATNA (Best Alternative To a Negotiated Agreement). Item (4) needs a search thru the legal system to seek out similar cases and find out the decisions that came thru to analyze the options of item (3) All this takes time and hence the silence, yet it does not mean they are sleeping
Ya, it can be argued that OS/2 was a failure. But what company doesn't have them. So what! M$ may have a team of 300 lbs team of gorillas for a legal team, but IMHO IBM is the 1200 lbs elephant. I'm not bothered by IBMs
There is a Turkish proverb (roughly translated) "Mosquito is small yet it makes you sick" SCO could be small compared to MS or IBM yet if you think, it has caused lots of things up to now. On the other hand when you have mosquitos then you need to have repellants :-) -- Togan Muftuoglu Unofficial SuSE FAQ Maintainer http://dinamizm.ath.cx