The SCO Group has released a new version of their SCO OpenServer product, version 6. It’s based on the same core as Unixware, and can run software for both systems.
SCO OpenServer 6 Released
About The Author
Adam Scheinberg
Technology Executive • Web Developer • Father • Foodie • Music Snob • OS enthusiast
Follow me on Mastodon @[email protected]
Open so you can see it and the they will sue you?
question: why would I use this when I can use Solaris for free? OpenServer 6 = Solaris 8 performance wise
This version probably include linux code.
Open so you can see it and the they will sue you?
The old Unix use of the word “open” ment ‘uses public specifications and APIs’ vs. the closed or lightly documented APIs in use by closed versions of other unix/Unix or non-unix systems.
It has nothing to do with open source.
While this use of ‘open’ was mostly true, it was not entirely so. Often ‘open’ was a marketing message and the different operating systems would do things in incompatable ways as a means to lock in customers. Being unix/Unix, this largely failed.
SCO’s use of open is from the same (now dead) older usage.
Here some the opensource zealots! Just shut up already.
On another note, We have a couple of SCO servers here and they run alright, kind of pricy for what you get. They don’t develop anything innovative. When I read about the new product I was like…oh..yeah, nothing new or exciting. They don’t really have anything to offer in my opinion. They state how they are secure and you can use them for “VPN’s and encrypted communications” and “stability”, but so can Linux, and it’s much cheaper.
We have Solaris, HP-UX and Linux here too, and Solaris beats all of them in my opinion, even the Linux. It’s more stable and has proven itself. Our linux servers that run on pretty good hardware are a little flaky.
The SCO boxes have been pretty reliable (no down time due to OS problems), they will be going the way of old yeller soon and will be replaced but some Solaris 1u’s that look pretty sharp.
the final release maybe
It was just a funny statement.
but your reply is very insightful.. thanks for the info…
“Open so you can see it and the they will sue you? ”
The old Unix use of the word “open” ment ‘uses public specifications and APIs’ vs. the closed or lightly documented APIs in use by closed versions of other unix/Unix or non-unix systems.
It has nothing to do with open source.
great, just what we need – operating systems programmed by lawyers. I mean, the developers must be almost completely gone by now, so I have a funny vision in my head of a 50 year old lawyer hammering out a buffer overflow patch on his lunch break …
They were nothing special about them, and we didn’t see any advantage to them, plus they were a little bit pricy. I don’t work there anymore, but have heard that they were swapped out for Linux servers last year (not sure what distro).
ha ha ha
I know there’s a lot of mean feelings about SCO, but I’m really curious if anyone would comtemplate buying their software (ie, for technical merit) and why. Please let us know (if you feel brave enough to admit it in a forum like this 🙂 ).
I don’t know how many people would purchase new SCO software, but I can think of plenty of mid-sized organizations that do not like change at all… so replacements would come from SCO.
That being said: I know many people aren’t nipping at the bit from the relase of OpenServer 6 (and OpenSolaris 10), but I think it’s great (lawyer jokes aside) and here’s why:
Before: How many new admins had access to SCO/Solaris boxes? Sure, *NIX boxes are similar in syntax and operation, but not one of them is identical. It can be very important knowing where error message pipe, how programs are loaded, etc… between the different *NIX family.
With the release of the OSS alternatives, those new admins can now set up boxes in their own lab and play around. Knowing both sides of the coin is important in any situation… using my earlier example. A new Admin who knows a ton about Linux or Solaris can now go into the traditional office who loves SCO (just because it’s what they have in place) and make recommendations on upgrades or not based on *real world facts*, not comments like “Linux rulz” or ‘SCO suckz’. Believe it or not: some experience, regardless of whether it was documents on a job or not, is much better than no experience.
Don’t be so closed minded in an OS: is a collection of 0’s and 1’s (that probably won’t matter in 20 years). Right tool for the right job!
My $.02
I know there’s a lot of mean feelings about SCO, but I’m really curious if anyone would comtemplate buying their software (ie, for technical merit) and why. Please let us know (if you feel brave enough to admit it in a forum like this 🙂 ).
No offence because I know you are doing your job (I’m assuming you work for SCO) but with your financials, how do you expect to inspire enough confidence in consumers so that they believe you will be around in say 2 years? With Linux this isn’t as big as an issue, for 2 main reasons. Novell and Red Hat are big companies (much bigger than SCO, espescially Novell) which will be around for probably much longer than SCO. The second reason is that if your distro provider does go under, you have the source code and can patch it yourself in-house. You can’t say that about OpenServer.
Also, with the whole sueing your customers fiasco, don’t you think that might scare away potential customers?
Also, just a hint, OSNews is a geek website. OpenServer is not a geek OS like Linux. SCO is on a seemingly endless and without proof (unless you guys find the hidden key for Blepp’s briefcase =P ) tirade against Linux, so do you honestly expect people at this site to want to use your products. (If you want to know what I mean, take a look at some of the articles from ’03 about you guys on this site)
I know there’s a lot of mean feelings about SCO, but I’m really curious if anyone would comtemplate buying their software (ie, for technical merit) and why. Please let us know (if you feel brave enough to admit it in a forum like this 🙂 ).
Existing users that do not want to change and want continued support.
Everyone else either never used it, has switched to something else, is working on a migration plan, or has a maintenance plan in place that does not rely on SCO.
SCO has a good chance of going out of business and no innovation has been seen from them since the lawsuits started. Even if the risk of collapse were low, you don’t hear any other vendors suing customers or loosing them at the rate SCO has. I can imagine that some SCO consultants are getting paid well right now, though I can’t see SCO the company making much money or retaining good employees.
No offence because I know you are doing your job (I’m assuming you work for SCO) but with your financials…
Umm… no I don’t work for SCO, and I’ve never even laid hands on anything made by SCO – I wouldn’t even think about using their stuff in a business environment for precisely the same reasons you mentioned above – I’m just curious if there are any *technical* reasons why anyone would choose SCO tools.
Also, just a hint, OSNews is a geek website. OpenServer is not a geek OS like Linux. SCO is on a seemingly endless and without proof (unless you guys find the hidden key for Blepp’s briefcase =P ) tirade against Linux, so do you honestly expect people at this site to want to use your products. (If you want to know what I mean, take a look at some of the articles from ’03 about you guys on this site)
I know what OSNews is … I’ve been reading it for years, and no, it’s not a website just for *geek* OS stuff – it’s a website for all OS stuff. That’s why I didn’t ask on /. or any of the other linux fanboy sites. I’m curious about the technical merits of SCO’s tools, just like I’m curious about the technical merits of everyone else’s tools … and this is the place to discuss them…
WIll SCO just whole up and go under already.
N/T
Why would anyone buy software from a firm that isn’t exactly viable anymore, has been surpassed for x86 Unix solutions and shows disregard for the Unix industry (and it’s customers)?
SCO’s been in the news for all the wrong reasons, it’s their own fault and I doubt anyone will suddenly turn around and embrace their software anymore.
It’s a shame, I miss the old SCO. I liked their products, but the sooner Caldera dies the better. 🙁
Chris.
What sort of a business would enter into a contract with SCO now? Given their habit of suing past customers, the last thing I would want would be to be in a binding contract with them and have my name and address on file at SCO’s office!
Kindof like buying concert tickets on the Titantic.
LOL, VonSkippy…That’s like the line of the day!
Don’t you have to relink the kernel in order to change ip settings on OpenServer? How about the default gateway?
IIRC OpenServer5.0 doesn’t even have a dhcp client avaliable. Simply put your comment for OSS zealots to shut up show your true form. I bet your not even the admin of those servers to be making the claims of flaky servers that run pretty good.
I call bullshit.
Of course 80% of the people who posted to this thread wasn’t “around” by the time SCO was the next big thing. I have used it and been a “scoadmin + enter” the past decade and it has proven to be reliable. In fact, I have some customers still using OpenServer.
Now, let the lawyers be lawyers..that’s why they get paid for.
Another note on this.. I wouldn’t consider myself a “UNIX(tm) Admin” only because I have a box running GNU/Linux at home.
Peace out fellas
Apache, Samba, MySQL, all that stuff. This after scox sent letters to congress declaring the GPL unconstitutional. And in many places in their lawsuit against IBM scox declared the GPL illegal, unenforcable, etc.
This is just a nitpick…but Apache isn’t GPL software. It is the standard HTTP daemon, however, so of course they include it.
Other than that, you have an extremely valid point.
Umm… no I don’t work for SCO, and I’ve never even laid hands on anything made by SCO – I wouldn’t even think about using their stuff in a business environment for precisely the same reasons you mentioned above – I’m just curious if there are any *technical* reasons why anyone would choose SCO tools.
Sorry, the way you worded your initial comment came off as someone who was working for SCO. I’ve seen other comments phrased similarly to yours made by company reps on online forums. I feel horrible though, I know what I would feel like if someone said I worked for SCO =P
I know what OSNews is … I’ve been reading it for years, and no, it’s not a website just for *geek* OS stuff – it’s a website for all OS stuff. That’s why I didn’t ask on /. or any of the other linux fanboy sites. I’m curious about the technical merits of SCO’s tools, just like I’m curious about the technical merits of everyone else’s tools … and this is the place to discuss them…
lol, in theory, yes. Read the forums and flamewars on this site though, and for the most part, it is a site with good content (for the most part) but immature visitors. I think it is pretty bad where I can read a title to a story (like about MS security vulnerabilities or Linux being ready for the desktop) and I know not to read the comments cause it will be a complete waste of time, as they will be flamewars on trolls for the most part with a couple intelligent comments mixed in.
Why would anyone buy software from a firm that isn’t exactly viable anymore, has been surpassed for x86 Unix solutions and shows disregard for the Unix industry (and it’s customers)?
SCO’s been in the news for all the wrong reasons, it’s their own fault and I doubt anyone will suddenly turn around and embrace their software anymore.
It’s a shame, I miss the old SCO. I liked their products, but the sooner Caldera dies the better. 🙁
I remember when SCO (Santa Cruz Operations) was run by a heavy set, bearded guy, who saw Windows 2000 as their number one threat.
What they failed to do, however, is adapt; they continued to price gouge customers, and wonder they left – anyone had a look at the licencing stucture of SCO’s products? its enough to bring a growm man to tears (yes, I did burst our in tears).
What was their best bet? when Windows 2000 was released, they should have started offering their whole SCO product line up for US$999, with 50 free technical support phone calls. Had they done it way back in 2000, they wouldn’t have lost the number of customers they did; they would be able to compete with Windows 2000 Server without any problems, both price, performance and features would beat Microsoft out of the box.
I tried OpenServer some years ago. No X, the compiler was a piece of shit (Microseft), horrible userland. Most apps I tried to build failed miserably, and gcc dropped SCO support after the Linux fiasco. Is anybody using this at all? Why? Linux, Solaris and BSD are lightyears ahead.
Die SCO die.
hehe…. off topic but… I find it ironic that now that Solaris was made open (Opensolaris), so many people on here think it is good, some even rave about it, before it went open most everyone on here thought it sucked hehe… funny.
this comes from someone who almost execlusively uses opensource os’s and aps.. gotta wonder what it looks like to your joe blow average guy who supports Windows and MS.
OpenServer5.0 doesn’t even have a dhcp client avaliable.
So you wanted a server to get an address by dhcp?
At my work, our apps and production are all ran on SCO OpenServer 5.0.6. I have had to administer a small LAN on this platform for about 2 years and IMO, it is a piece of crap.
From the total failure of interoperability with other platforms to the quirks of its filesystem and NFS implementation, this thing needs to be shot dead. SCO support sucks (unless you cough up alot of money) and is a bitch to compile anything with unless you overhaul all the tools with the GNU replacements (even then it might prevent you from installing applications.)
Don’t get me wrong, at first I was excited to work with it since it shared more likeness with the “System V” flavor of UNIX (which I needed more experience) and had a decent security implementation. Although in time I became frustrated with how closed I was from alot of the system, using SCO’s provided APIs (eg. scoadmin.) Even SCO’s website documentation only walks through solutions using their API and does not describe the cause of the issue any deeper than that. If it wasn’t for APlawrence.com, I would be totally lost.
Now we are migrating to Linux and I feel totally liberated. I am able to take a lot of the homegrown shell scripted solutions we had on SCO and toss them since there are very powerful tools at my disposal. I can now run Apache 2 + PHP5 + mySQL in the blink of an eye and even mount SMB shares. NFS is alot cleaner and the bugs we had in SCO have now dissapeared in Linux. All hail open systems.
I didnt even read the article for fear that I might split my spleen laughing so hard.
Try the new SUE OpenServer….meaning it will serve you papers for infringment.