SCO vs. Fedora Core - Redhat

This is a discussion on SCO vs. Fedora Core - Redhat ; A friend of mine needs a Linux for an Intel platform. He is thinking of SCO. I suggested Fedora Core, which I use. Any arguments on either side of this? Thanks, Mike....

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: SCO vs. Fedora Core

  1. SCO vs. Fedora Core

    A friend of mine needs a Linux for an Intel
    platform. He is thinking of SCO. I suggested
    Fedora Core, which I use. Any arguments on
    either side of this?

    Thanks,
    Mike.


  2. Re: SCO vs. Fedora Core

    On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:50:27 -0500, Mike - EMAIL IGNORED wrote:

    > A friend of mine needs a Linux for an Intel
    > platform. He is thinking of SCO. I suggested
    > Fedora Core, which I use. Any arguments on
    > either side of this?


    Are you kidding? There's arguments on both sides of everything.

    Does SCO still provide a free version of their OS? ...I guess they would
    have to provide a free version of their Linux distribution (at least the
    source).

    --
    The USA Patriot Act is the most unpatriotic act in American history.


  3. Re: SCO vs. Fedora Core

    Mike - EMAIL IGNORED writes:
    >A friend of mine needs a Linux for an Intel
    >platform. He is thinking of SCO. I suggested
    >Fedora Core, which I use. Any arguments on
    >either side of this?
    >
    >Thanks,
    >Mike.
    >


    Go here
    and read up on SCO first.

    scott

  4. Re: SCO vs. Fedora Core

    On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:50:27 -0500, Mike - EMAIL IGNORED wrote:

    > A friend of mine needs a Linux for an Intel
    > platform. He is thinking of SCO. I suggested
    > Fedora Core, which I use. Any arguments on
    > either side of this?
    >
    > Thanks,
    > Mike.

    I see that I misspoke. He needs a Unix that need
    not be Linux.

    Mike.

  5. Re: SCO vs. Fedora Core

    On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 09:35:05 -0500, Mike - EMAIL IGNORED wrote:

    > On Tue, 28 Mar 2006 17:50:27 -0500, Mike - EMAIL IGNORED wrote:
    >
    >> A friend of mine needs a Linux for an Intel
    >> platform. He is thinking of SCO. I suggested
    >> Fedora Core, which I use. Any arguments on
    >> either side of this?
    >>

    > I see that I misspoke. He needs a Unix that need
    > not be Linux.


    SCO Unix is extremely expensive.

    --
    The USA Patriot Act is the most unpatriotic act in American history.


  6. Re: SCO vs. Fedora Core

    You might concider BSD, of any variety...even freeBSD is based on the
    Berkley Unix kernel, it will behave more like traditional unix as
    opposed to Linux, however Fedora Core would also be strongly concidered
    long before SCO, but thats my personal opinion.


  7. Re: SCO vs. Fedora Core

    apscism@up.com wrote:

    > You might concider BSD, of any variety...even freeBSD is based on the
    > Berkley Unix kernel, it will behave more like traditional unix as
    > opposed to Linux, however Fedora Core would also be strongly concidered
    > long before SCO, but thats my personal opinion.


    MHO, is any version of Unix or any version of Linux is good. Just say no to
    any thing SCO has to offer... remember AutoZone and DaimlerChrysler.


    --
    "A personal computer is called a personal computer because it's yours,
    Anything that runs on that computer, you should have control over."
    Andrew Moss, Microsoft's senior director of technical policy, 2005

  8. Re: SCO vs. Fedora Core

    "apscism@up.com" writes:
    >You might concider BSD, of any variety...even freeBSD is based on the
    >Berkley Unix kernel, it will behave more like traditional unix as


    Sorry pal, but "traditional unix" predates BSD, and was the
    basis for BSD. That said, Linux command level looks more like
    SVR4 (also a 'direct descendent' of "traditional unix") than BSD.

    scott

+ Reply to Thread