OT: Question re: SCO Use

[Tim Fischer]

I can understand the legacy systems - that makes sense.  But aren't 
people currently deploying SCO boxes?  Is it because their application 
is tied to other apps that run only on SCO?  (As the two that you 
described below.)

Tim Fischer





Jay R. Ashworth wrote:

>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
>  
>