Re: GPL'ing Solaris won't save SUN

[Mike Cox]

Alan Coopersmith <alanc@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote in message 
news:<cgdlup$g73$1@agate.berkeley.edu>...
> mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com (Mike Cox) writes in comp.unix.solaris:
> |Then why the hell should a linux advocate even care if SUN is going to
> |Open Source Solaris?  
> 
> Perhaps they shouldn't.

They don't.  And CEOs don't either. If you talk to people in IT, SUN
is becoming the definition of clueless. Most Unix shops are now run by
Linux advocates, look how quickly Linux is replacing Unix.  If Linux
advocates don't guide the PHB to SUN (and they won't if it doesn't
have a TRUE Linux strategy), then IBM will get all SUN's business.
Funny how quickly the tables turn.  Throughout the 90's SUN was eating
IBM's mainframe business, and now SUN is totally clueless.
 
> |If a person who is not a SUN engineer/employee
> |cannot make changes to the CVS or take code and put it in another OS
> |(aka BSD license), then it has no value.
> 
> Maybe no value to you, but it still has lots of value to lots of other
> people, even with those restrictions.

I really don't care what SUN does or what Linux advocates do.  I'm a
Windows user, and my company is a successful windows shop.  I'm just
pointing out that SUN is more delusional then the Linux camp.  Linux
will never win the desktop, and open-sourcing Solaris will fail. If I
were running SUN, I'd keep Solaris closed source, add Linux affinity,
rebrand Solaris 10 to show that linux affinity, and then get Linux to
run on every single SUN box.  Those are the things that will stop
SUN's hemoraging of customers.