Sun sets up open-source Solaris project

I really don't want to hear about it until they do it. Technically it is not open-source now because it isn't available now, simple as that. Why must Sun make headline news with announcements that sound like they were written by a M$ representative.

I guess SCO will be out of business by that time? Seems that Sun paid for a UNIX license. I can't imagine SCO allowing them to do this under whatever license agreement they signed. Good thing Linux doesn't have any encumbered UNIX code in it.

remember OpenOffice owes its existence to Sun. Moreover, agreed they seem schizophrenic regarding Linux and 'Open Source' in its various guises but they have contributed in the past. Furthermore, there have been bigger doses of vapor by others that never delivered either prior to their announcement nor afterward.

[I think I read this same article elsewhere so I do not intent to vote, however, I have seen too much rancor against symbols such as Sun and RedHat that are certainly warranted particularly in regard to the latter.]

Hey, I'm just saying, tell me about it when it happens. Do I doubt it will happen? No, it will happen, I am sure of that. Sun definitely has good people. I just hate news that isn't. We know they are planning it, we heard that before. So this is just "keep everyone on their toes" type of news.

mojavelinux - just read your post and I am in agreement, it is just common to see posts well before the action. Moreover, you seem more certain than I that they will follow through. I cannot believe Solaris will appear soon due to the SCO threats.

I wish to thank you for your response, because I noticed a gross error in my original post:

s/warranted/unwarranted/ -- as written that was a gross distortion of the point I was trying to make. Prior to my posting I read of a professor that thought it was unjustified for RedHat to expect payment for their distribution (approximately) 'all they do is repackage the distribution'. This is astounding ignorance, since for years RedHat paid the maintainer of the current kernel. Moreover, many on the Gnome development core were employees of RedHat. What puzzled me is that Suse had such a good reputation with Yast being cited by many users, yet until Suse was acquired by Novell Yast was NOT GPL'ed!! Enough you get my drift.

Looking at the votes, they're voting on Sun's position, not on whether the article was good reporting or not. I think LXer should reference articles like this, but think the intent of the article itself is very ho-hum. I haven't even read it to assess the reporting skills of the author, which a the third (content) factor.

Who would like the ability to vote +/- the intent, content and LXer suitability on a six-by-two grid? And perhaps later filter on one or more grid rows once one side of that row hits ten votes?

I think you have a valid approach - one of the reasons I did not vote was the too simple fully for or against, neither of which would have been my response. I am somewhat reserved about a grid, because it may require too much reflection, hence, 1 to 10 scoring with a comment may be slightly easier though just a slight bit more enlightening to the eye of the passerby.

Are you proposing a form that could be filled out for each story. with multiple choices?

dave

I had brought this up before. I wanted there to be an option for a middle of the road vote (ho-hum if you will), although I didn't ask for a distinction between writer and content. There are several that I would have voted down the middle on but just couldn't vote. Now that Dave has implemented the vote comment that would allow us to give a short "ho-hum" comment.

I would propose a single digit in the range of 1 to 9 where 5 is absolutely neutral, 1 is extremely bad and 9 extremely good. A comment on the criteria used might be used by another reader as to how much weight to give the assessment.

[I Love the built-in spell checker: great! I am the second worst English speller in the world.]

Bad spellers of the world, UNTIE!

I are a good speller.