OT: Question re: SCO Use

[Jay R. Ashworth]

On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 04:58:47PM -0400, Tim Fischer wrote:
> You know, John's recent posts have brought up a good question to me.  
> Why SCO?

Inertia.

>           I mean, I've noticed a lot of SCO based questions here.  Both 
> FP shops that I've worked in were SCO shops when I started.  Is there 
> some old relationship between FP & SCO?  Is there a general consensus 
> here that SCO is better?  Easier?  Is it cheaper?  (I have no idea about 
> licensing with them.)
> 
> Given SCO's current legal issues, I'm surprised that anyone would really 
> want to rely on their stability and I, for one, wouldn't want to give 
> them any of my money. 

Us neither.  We have all but, maybe, 2 or our clients switched over to
Linux by now; each has something that won't reliably run on Linux (Real
World 9, in one case; I think the other one has *really old* Fourgen
menuing).  We'll eventually find a way to move them, too...

but that's it, mostly: hardware or software that won't run on Linux, or
inertia.

Chers,
-- jra
-- 
Jay R. Ashworth                                                jra at baylink.com
Designer                          Baylink                             RFC 2100
Ashworth & Associates        The Things I Think                        '87 e24
St Petersburg FL USA      http://baylink.pitas.com             +1 727 647 1274

      If you can read this... thank a system administrator.  Or two.  --me