SCO, Linux, and Microsoft in the History of OS: 2000s

[nes...@wigner.berkeley.edu]

Roughly drafted has a series on the history of SCO, Linux and
Microsoft, prompted by the remark by Daniel Lyons that Caldera had
extorted payment from Microsoft in the DR DOS settlement. Following
are quotes from one of the series.

<Quote>
[Remarks on history of Apple in 1990's...Apple and NeXT...Death of
Yellow Box...]

Apple Takes on Microsoft: 2002 - 2007.
[NeXTSTEP, Unix software merged with Apple software...]

The new infusion of technology enabled Apple to rapidly outpace
Microsoft. After delivering a fifth version of NT as Windows 2000, and
subsequently rolling in support for consumer hardware and gaming with
the 2001 update Windows XP, Microsoft embarked on five years of
abortive failure in releasing its next major update of NT 6.0, code
named Longhorn and eventually shipping as Windows Vista.

In the meantime, Apple released its first mainstream version of Mac OS
X 10.2 Jaguar in 2002, followed by 10.3 Panther in 2003 and 10.4 Tiger
in 2005. Being built upon a Unix foundation also allowed Apple to
provide X11 compatibility, making Macs attractive to users in higher
education and within science and technology markets.

[New array of products at Apple...]

Caledera's OpenLinux: The Linux "Mac OS X" That Failed: 1996 - 2002.
Apple wasn't the only company working to take on Microsoft. After Ray
Noorda's plans to build a rival to Microsoft's Windows and Office
businesses using Unix and WordPerfect were abruptly ended by his
ouster from Novell, he began an independent second attempt in his 70s
using Caldera Systems.

Noorda partnered with Ransom Love, a Novell marketing executive, to
develop a cross platform, Linux-based desktop that could rival
Windows. Caldera had acquired assets related to DR-DOS from Novell in
1996, and used these to win a settlement against Microsoft for its
illegal actions against Digital Research from 1981 to 1995.

Caldera wasn't just a litigation company, however. From 1996 to 2002,
Caldera had worked to deliver OpenLinux as a common application
platform that developers could use to build Linux applications. The
problem was that there was a very small installed client base for
Linux in the Enterprise, and no significant desktop applications for
Linux. Noorda hoped to solve this catch-22 by working to:

1.
· port the Corel WordPerfect and CorelDraw apps to Linux.
2.
· migrate the existing, significant installed base of commercial
Unix users to Linux.

Users + Applications = Platform.
[Strategy similar to Apple's toward Microsoft...]

After winning its settlement against Microsoft in 2000, the relatively
tiny Caldera had the cash to buy up the much larger Santa Cruz
Operation, the company that now held distribution rights to the
commercial Unix that Noorda had acquired from AT&T while at Novell,
only to subsequently lose after he was dismissed from Novell.

Caldera acquired the Santa Cruz Operation and began efforts to move
its commercial Unix user base to Linux. Those users included both SCO
Unix, originally derived from Microsoft's Xenix, and UnixWare, the
more modern but still dated AT&T Unix.

While Linux was already far beyond the capabilities of the then
stagnant commercial Unix variants, it was still a tough sell to move
entrenched Unix users to Linux. Linux was fractured into different
distros just as Unix had been in the 90s, complicating maintenance and
development. That was particularly an issue for commercial Unix users
who expected more conservative stability from their vendor.

Caldera's Failed United Linux: 2002.
Two years later, in 2002, Caldera formed United Linux in a partnership
with SuSE Linux, Turbolinux, and Conectiva. The goal was to develop a
Linux platform targeted to Enterprise use, primarily to compete
against the established Red Hat Linux distro.

The United Linux partners planned to develop a common platform called
the Linux Standard Base, removing some of the uncertainty involved
with the differing Linux distros; they essentially decided to
standardize on SuSE's technically superior implementation of its Linux
distro and co-market it in their respective locations:

1.
·Caldera in North America
2.
·SuSE in Europe
3.
·Turbolinux in Asia
4.
·Conectiva in South America

[Caldera's efforts failed...]

Caldera's War on Linux: 2002 - 2003.
The company moved even further from Linux when Caldera brought on
McBride as CEO in the middle of 2002. McBride rebranded Caldera as The
SCO Group, recognizing that the majority of the company's business was
made up of customers still using legacy commercial Unix.

[Noorda retired, McBride changed the company completely...]

Under McBride, The SCO Group redefined itself as the standard of all
commercial Unix. This took a weird turn when McBride announced that
Linux improperly violated its copyright by incorporating commercial
Unix code. Defenders of Linux maintained that all the code in Linux
was independently implemented. Everyone associated with Linux
developments at SCO began to jump ship, including Noorda and Love.

Somewhat ironically, United Linux folded in 2003 when Novell bought
SuSE to adopt it as its new, ongoing Linux strategy, effectively pitch
hitting for Noorda in a fourth swing at creating a new platform to
rival Windows:

1.
·Noorda's 1993 Novell Unix.
2.
·Noorda's 1996 Caldera OpenLinux.
3.
·Noorda's 2002 United Linux.
4.
·Novell's current SuSE Linux.

Caldera vs Microsoft and SCO vs Linux.
SCO's assault on Linux was characterized by Daniel Lyons and other
observers as a simple replay of the litigation Caldera led against
Microsoft related to DR-DOS. This wasn't accurate however.

The difference between SCO's lawsuit against Linux and Caldera's
earlier lawsuit against Microsoft was that Caldera had a smoking gun,
a dead body, a motive, and an opportunity all documented against
Microsoft. There was no case to argue; DR-DOS had its hands tied and
was publicly shot in the face by Microsoft in broad daylight.

SCO had nothing more than accusations against Linux, and refused to
offer any reason to believe any of its claims. Over the next five
years, SCO argued that Linux users owed it royalty payments for
borrowing lines of code that it refused to present any evidence of,
and warned companies that any use of Linux could expose them to
expensive legal problems.

DR-DOS Settlement Reverts to Fund Microsoft's War on Linux: 2003 -
2007.
In 2000, Microsoft had no problem paying out hundreds of millions to
Caldera to cover up its ugly history related to DR-DOS. Rather
conveniently for Microsoft, just two years later Caldera's Microsoft
settlement had been converted into SCO, an anti-Linux litigation
company that now served Microsoft's own interests.

SCO needed more money to maintain its years of war on Linux, so
Microsoft donated millions of dollars in "Unix licensing" to help SCO
continue its litigation against Microsoft's competitors, including IBM
and Novell.

[SCO suits against IBM and Novell...]

That claim was shot down last week when Judge Dale Kimball handed down
a ruling that found Novell did indeed own the copyright to Unix and
UnixWare. That in turn deflated SCO's case against Linux, as it has no
basis to claim any copyright infringements at all.

The Futile Fight Against the Future.
Rather than trying to adapt and change for the future, SCO hoped to
prevent it from happening, just as IBM once tried to hold back
personal computing, just as DOS users in the 80s tried to hold back
graphical computing, and just as Microsoft is working to hold back
free and open source software computing today.

Efforts to fight the future through threats of litigation similarly
promise to ensnare Microsoft in a war it can't win as it seeks to
maintain its illicitly acquired and scandalously maintained monopoly
position in PC software.
</Quote>

http://roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q3.07/320486BD-356A-4129-A240-919491B024E3.html