Scott Lemon reports rumour of massive layoff at SCO - SCO

This is a discussion on Scott Lemon reports rumour of massive layoff at SCO - SCO ; http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/rea...msgid=24273591 He says that he has heard from "numerous sources" that 30-40 people have been laid off, with only 50-70 remaining and that the New Jersey office is on the brink of closing....

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 33

Thread: Scott Lemon reports rumour of massive layoff at SCO

  1. Scott Lemon reports rumour of massive layoff at SCO

    http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/rea...msgid=24273591

    He says that he has heard from "numerous sources" that 30-40 people have
    been laid off, with only 50-70 remaining and that the New Jersey office is
    on the brink of closing.

  2. Re: Scott Lemon reports rumour of massive layoff at SCO

    In jd:

    [Snip...]

    > only 50-70 remaining and that the New Jersey office is on the brink


    Scott Lemon? The same Scott Lemon touting SCOX stock all these years?


    ^#@!&?(*% WHERE ARE THE HELL ARE THE ^#@!&?(*% LIFEBOATS!!!!


    --
    Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
    Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
    Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
    Kids jumping ship? Looking to hire an old-school type? Email me.

  3. Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.



    On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, jd wrote:

    > http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/rea...msgid=24273591
    >
    > He says that he has heard from "numerous sources" that 30-40 people have been
    > laid off, with only 50-70 remaining and that the New Jersey office is on the
    > brink of closing.


    A recent filing in the BK court shows 5 layoffs.
    http://scofacts.org/SCO-Group-bankruptcy-333.pdf

    People with 10+ years of service appear to be getting a pittance from SCO
    in severance benefits. Meanwhile the ability of the company to maintain
    and support Openserver is clearly dying.

    To those who smugly suggested that there would be a buyout of the Unix
    business and support would continue -- why would anyone buy the company if
    all the expertise has left or been fired?


  4. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    JD wrote:
    >
    >
    > On Fri, 1 Feb 2008, jd wrote:
    >
    >> http://siliconinvestor.advfn.com/rea...msgid=24273591
    >>
    >> He says that he has heard from "numerous sources" that 30-40 people
    >> have been laid off, with only 50-70 remaining and that the New Jersey
    >> office is on the brink of closing.

    >
    >
    > A recent filing in the BK court shows 5 layoffs.
    > http://scofacts.org/SCO-Group-bankruptcy-333.pdf
    >
    > People with 10+ years of service appear to be getting a pittance from
    > SCO in severance benefits. Meanwhile the ability of the company to
    > maintain and support Openserver is clearly dying.
    >
    > To those who smugly suggested that there would be a buyout of the Unix
    > business and support would continue -- why would anyone buy the company
    > if all the expertise has left or been fired?


    Back when AT&T was the sole owner of sysV source code
    it was so terribly overpriced that people in various
    parts of the world actually got together to clone it
    well enough to make AT&T's version worth a whole lot
    less. That level of success has taken a long time.

    AT&T saw the handwriting on the wall and bailed.
    Their corporate culture (now Lucent) has never
    managed to achieve the achieved the transition
    from a protected monopoly mindset to free market
    strategies.

    Now the whole sysV thing is sinking as linux has
    become a viable OS and MS has become a more or
    less mature product.

    I was sorry to see Coherent, and independent cloning
    endeavor, go down the tubes some years back. As as
    someone who had to run sysV on 80286 and 80386
    machines I'm not sorry to see the AT&T versions
    finally disappearing. And I'm one of those people
    whose first exposure to computers was sysV machines.
    Only later, when I discovered there was a whole
    other viable pocketful of working operating systems
    did I realize what a jackass AT&T had become. To me
    it seemed as though that mentality followed the
    product line once AT&T sold out to SCO.

    Perhaps it is, after all, best suited to telephone
    switching service.

  5. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    In JD:

    [Snip...]

    > all the expertise has left or been fired?


    Anyone hallucinating any use whatsoever left in SCO is nuts, end of story.

    --
    Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
    Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
    Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
    Kids jumping ship? Looking to hire an old-school type? Email me.

  6. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    foolsrushout wrote:
    [SNIP]
    > I was sorry to see Coherent, and independent cloning
    > endeavor, go down the tubes some years back. As as
    > someone who had to run sysV on 80286 and 80386
    > machines I'm not sorry to see the AT&T versions
    > finally disappearing. And I'm one of those people

    You do know that Solaris (and therefore OpenSolaris, go read the source,
    my boy) are System V Release 4, don't you?

    Cheers,
    Gary B-)

    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    Armful of chairs: Something some people would not know
    whether you were up them with or not
    - Barry Humphries

  7. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    >
    > Anyone hallucinating any use whatsoever left in SCO is nuts, end of story.
    >


    Harold and friends,

    I honestly don't think I've ever received so much unsolicited advice
    in my life. Not when I got married, not when I bought my first car.
    Possibly when I bought an emergency generator for my house and made
    the mistake of telling a bunch of guys in Lowes. Then I got all kinds
    of horrifying advice on how to re-wire my house from people who
    obviously knew nothing about electricity, had never seen my house or
    knew what I wanted to accomplish, and moreover didn't ask.

    This is a newsgroup that is devoted to people who use and support SCO
    products. Just wanted to point that out. I don't recall anybody who
    regularly posts to this list broadcasting a plea for advice on
    migrating to another O/S. Everybody knows what the situation is, and
    what their options are.

    You obviously don't care, or you wouldn't waste your time and mine
    posting nonsensical commentary such as this. There are plenty of
    places where I can get information about alternatives, and people
    whose opinions I value, and who I trust to give me a trustworthy
    recommendation. (I have noticed that if you ask five linux fans what
    the "best" flavor of linux is today, you'll get at least eight
    answers.)

    I place your advice in the same category as the 'experts' at Lowes.
    Worthless and harmless as long as I'm smart enough to ignore you.
    Neither you nor any of your cronies, who seem to delight in haunting
    this list for the sole purpose of sneering, ask meaningful questions
    about my business purposes in using SCO products, nor the purposes of
    my clients and their businesses, nor the applications which we use.

    Therefore, I dismiss your shallow and thoughtless comments as trivial
    and without value or purpose. Please go away.

    Mark

  8. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.


    I've filed the following in the "everyone deserves
    to write a meaningless flame now and then" drawer.

    I have a client still using sco, a deficiency that
    will be resolved this year.

    Thank you.


    mbennett wrote:
    >>Anyone hallucinating any use whatsoever left in SCO is nuts, end of story.
    >>

    >
    >
    > Harold and friends,
    >
    > I honestly don't think I've ever received so much unsolicited advice
    > in my life. Not when I got married, not when I bought my first car.
    > Possibly when I bought an emergency generator for my house and made
    > the mistake of telling a bunch of guys in Lowes. Then I got all kinds
    > of horrifying advice on how to re-wire my house from people who
    > obviously knew nothing about electricity, had never seen my house or
    > knew what I wanted to accomplish, and moreover didn't ask.
    >
    > This is a newsgroup that is devoted to people who use and support SCO
    > products. Just wanted to point that out. I don't recall anybody who
    > regularly posts to this list broadcasting a plea for advice on
    > migrating to another O/S. Everybody knows what the situation is, and
    > what their options are.
    >
    > You obviously don't care, or you wouldn't waste your time and mine
    > posting nonsensical commentary such as this. There are plenty of
    > places where I can get information about alternatives, and people
    > whose opinions I value, and who I trust to give me a trustworthy
    > recommendation. (I have noticed that if you ask five linux fans what
    > the "best" flavor of linux is today, you'll get at least eight
    > answers.)
    >
    > I place your advice in the same category as the 'experts' at Lowes.
    > Worthless and harmless as long as I'm smart enough to ignore you.
    > Neither you nor any of your cronies, who seem to delight in haunting
    > this list for the sole purpose of sneering, ask meaningful questions
    > about my business purposes in using SCO products, nor the purposes of
    > my clients and their businesses, nor the applications which we use.
    >
    > Therefore, I dismiss your shallow and thoughtless comments as trivial
    > and without value or purpose. Please go away.
    >
    > Mark


  9. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.



    On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, mbennett wrote:

    >>
    >> Anyone hallucinating any use whatsoever left in SCO is nuts, end of story.
    >>

    >
    > Harold and friends,
    >
    > I honestly don't think I've ever received so much unsolicited advice
    > in my life. Not when I got married, not when I bought my first car.
    > Possibly when I bought an emergency generator for my house and made
    > the mistake of telling a bunch of guys in Lowes. Then I got all kinds
    > of horrifying advice on how to re-wire my house from people who
    > obviously knew nothing about electricity, had never seen my house or
    > knew what I wanted to accomplish, and moreover didn't ask.


    So are you saying that advice to dump SCO products is wrong? The
    implication is that you think that SCO has a future, since you equate the
    advice to bad advice that you received elsewhere.

    >
    > This is a newsgroup that is devoted to people who use and support SCO
    > products.


    Actually, you might note that the newsgroup is a ".misc" group.
    Information about layoffs is clearly relevent to this group.


    > Just wanted to point that out. I don't recall anybody who
    > regularly posts to this list broadcasting a plea for advice on
    > migrating to another O/S. Everybody knows what the situation is, and
    > what their options are.


    So use a killfile.

    >
    > You obviously don't care, or you wouldn't waste your time and mine
    > posting nonsensical commentary such as this. There are plenty of
    > places where I can get information about alternatives, and people
    > whose opinions I value, and who I trust to give me a trustworthy
    > recommendation. (I have noticed that if you ask five linux fans what
    > the "best" flavor of linux is today, you'll get at least eight
    > answers.)


    Obviously people have different opinions. Asking which Linux distro is
    "best" is usually counterproductive. The question should be
    something like "which is most suited to my target application?"

    >
    > I place your advice in the same category as the 'experts' at Lowes.
    > Worthless and harmless as long as I'm smart enough to ignore you.


    By replying, you show that you are not "smart enough to ignore .."


    > Neither you nor any of your cronies, who seem to delight in haunting
    > this list for the sole purpose of sneering, ask meaningful questions
    > about my business purposes in using SCO products, nor the purposes of
    > my clients and their businesses, nor the applications which we use.


    That's proably because a significant number of people who post and read
    here are clearly in denial about SCO's future, and other issues, such as
    the security of SCO's products (check out the history of security patches
    -- they went from 1-2 per month to approx 2 per year after May 2006).

    People have posted here suggesting that even if SCO shuts down, it is
    likely that another company would buy and continue the Unix products.
    Recent developments suggest that such an event is less likely.

    > Therefore, I dismiss your shallow and thoughtless comments as trivial
    > and without value or purpose. Please go away.


    No. Please use a killfile.

  10. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    On Feb 7, 10:14 am, mbennett
    wrote:



    > ask meaningful questions
    > about my business purposes in using SCO products, nor the purposes of
    > my clients and their businesses, nor the applications which we use.
    >
    > Therefore, I dismiss your shallow and thoughtless comments as trivial
    > and without value or purpose. Please go away.
    >
    > Mark


    I'll bite. Why are you still using SCO Products and for what
    purposes?
    Do you have migration plans if worse comes tor worst?

    I'm asking because all of my clients have moved on to different
    flavors of the SVR4 code base or, more recently, Linux.

    Peace,
    Dave

  11. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    In jd:

    [Snip..]

    > No. Please use a killfile.


    Indeed. As some of us say here in Texas, it's a hit dog that yells.

    --
    Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
    Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
    Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
    Kids jumping ship? Looking to hire an old-school type? Email me.

  12. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    On Thu, Feb 07, 2008, Nym.Faux@gmail.com wrote:
    >On Feb 7, 10:14 am, mbennett
    >wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >> ask meaningful questions
    >> about my business purposes in using SCO products, nor the purposes of
    >> my clients and their businesses, nor the applications which we use.
    >>
    >> Therefore, I dismiss your shallow and thoughtless comments as trivial
    >> and without value or purpose. Please go away.
    >>
    >> Mark


    >I'll bite. Why are you still using SCO Products and for what purposes? Do
    >you have migration plans if worse comes tor worst?


    I have one client still running OSR 5.0.6a to run RealWorld accounting
    software that's been customized for their application. They're in the
    process of retiring and the business will be retired as well. If their
    system dies, that will simply speed the retirement. FWIW, this was
    Celestial's first customer in 1984 when they were running Xenix on a Tandy
    6000, and they're still running FilePro applications that were running
    then.

    We have an OSR 5.0.6a system here that is used to support customer's
    software where I need to compile things, and on occassion, to retrieve data
    from older systems.

    >I'm asking because all of my clients have moved on to different flavors of
    >the SVR4 code base or, more recently, Linux.


    We have moved most of our clients to Linux over the years, originally
    Caldera, then SuSE, now CentOS, with only a few staying on SCO where they
    were running applications that couldn't be run on other systems (e.g.
    running 80286 Xenix binaries where the source code has been lost for
    decades).

    By and large, people running business applications don't care what the
    operating system is, just that the systems be secure, reliable, do their
    job, and cost as little as possible. Often the first step in a migration
    is to bring up a Linux box to perform new functions that would cost more to
    implement on their existing SCO systems, then moving their core application
    as the old hardware forces it.

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: bill@celestial.com Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
    URL: http://www.celestial.com/ PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676

    Democracy must be sometihng more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what
    to have for dinner -- James Bovard

  13. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.



    On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Bill Campbell wrote:

    >
    > By and large, people running business applications don't care what the
    > operating system is, just that the systems be secure,


    And there lies the problem. Do you really think that all the packages that
    are included in Openserver these days have not had more than a total of
    about 5 security issues over the past year? I would be willing to bet that
    I could go through the open source packages that are included in OSR6 and
    find security reports that have not been addressed with a patch from SCO.

    It strains credibility to think that an operating system that needed
    monthly (and more) patches up to May 2006 suddenly only needs a couple of
    patches per year.


  14. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    jd wrote:
    >
    >
    > On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Bill Campbell wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> By and large, people running business applications don't care what the
    >> operating system is, just that the systems be secure,

    >
    >
    > And there lies the problem. Do you really think that all the packages
    > that are included in Openserver these days have not had more than a
    > total of about 5 security issues over the past year? I would be willing
    > to bet that I could go through the open source packages that are
    > included in OSR6 and find security reports that have not been addressed
    > with a patch from SCO.
    >
    > It strains credibility to think that an operating system that needed
    > monthly (and more) patches up to May 2006 suddenly only needs a couple
    > of patches per year.


    Fortunately the one client system I'm involved with is
    not and will never be connected to the internet *and*
    the employees are so computer unsavvy that all pertinent
    files are universally rwx enabled. They all share one
    account and password which has been "password" since
    before I came on their scene.

    I'm in the process of updating their foxbase interpreter
    POS software to get them off SCO and onto a linux file
    server with a windows user interface. I won't need a
    multiuser server license for the linux box.

    I can't think of a single "feature" about AT&T sysV that
    I'll miss when I finish this migration. With more than
    25 years of sysV under my belt I'm not going to miss
    it at all. Look for a 1 cent sale of all sysV that I
    have on eBay when that day arrives.

    Legitimate SCO discussions naturally include griping.
    The better I've come to know the OS the more I dislike
    it.

  15. Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    On Thu, Feb 07, 2008, jd wrote:
    >
    >
    >On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Bill Campbell wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> By and large, people running business applications don't care what the
    >> operating system is, just that the systems be secure,

    >
    >And there lies the problem. Do you really think that all the packages that
    >are included in Openserver these days have not had more than a total of
    >about 5 security issues over the past year? I would be willing to bet that
    >I could go through the open source packages that are included in OSR6 and
    >find security reports that have not been addressed with a patch from SCO.
    >
    >It strains credibility to think that an operating system that needed
    >monthly (and more) patches up to May 2006 suddenly only needs a couple of
    >patches per year.


    That's all well and good, except that we're talking about systems
    sitting in the back room, not connected to the Internet, and
    running a single accounting application. They Just Run(tm), and
    have uptimes measured in years, and often go for over a decade
    with little or no changes.

    The open source packages on them are ones that I've built myself.
    My site, ftp.celestial.com, was a major source of open source
    software ported to SCO before most people knew what open source
    is and before Linux was in wide use.

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: bill@celestial.com Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
    URL: http://www.celestial.com/ PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676

    Americans are so enamored of equality that they would rather be equal
    in slavery than unequal in freedom.
    -- Alexis de Tocqueville, 1805-1859

  16. OT: Linux Distros. Was Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    Bill Campbell wrote:
    >
    > We have moved most of our clients to Linux over the years, originally
    > Caldera, then SuSE, now CentOS,


    Out of interest, why the switch from SuSE to CentOS (and not RHEL)?


  17. Re: OT: Linux Distros. Was Re: Confirmation of at least 5 morelayoffs.

    On Feb 8, 3:06 am, RedGrittyBrick
    wrote:
    > Bill Campbell wrote:
    >
    > > We have moved most of our clients to Linux over the years, originally
    > > Caldera, then SuSE, now CentOS,

    >
    > Out of interest, why the switch from SuSE to CentOS (and not RHEL)?


    I'll jump in here.

    CentOS is RHEL repackaged in a free (as in beer) format.
    No support contracts. It IS RHEL, but free as in beer.

    Peace,
    Dave

  18. Re: OT: Linux Distros. Was Re: Confirmation of at least 5 more layoffs.

    Nym.Faux@gmail.com typed (on Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 02:14:52AM -0800):
    | On Feb 8, 3:06 am, RedGrittyBrick
    | wrote:
    | > Bill Campbell wrote:
    | >
    | > > We have moved most of our clients to Linux over the years, originally
    | > > Caldera, then SuSE, now CentOS,
    | >
    | > Out of interest, why the switch from SuSE to CentOS (and not RHEL)?
    |
    | I'll jump in here.
    |
    | CentOS is RHEL repackaged in a free (as in beer) format.
    | No support contracts. It IS RHEL, but free as in beer.
    |
    | Peace,
    | Dave

    What beer are you getting thats free?
    I'm trying to correlate free beer to free CentOS.

    - Jeff H

  19. Re: OT: Linux Distros. Was Re: Confirmation of at least 5 morelayoffs.

    On Fri, Feb 08, 2008, RedGrittyBrick wrote:
    >Bill Campbell wrote:
    >>
    >> We have moved most of our clients to Linux over the years, originally
    >> Caldera, then SuSE, now CentOS,

    >
    >Out of interest, why the switch from SuSE to CentOS (and not RHEL)?


    This could be the start of another religious war :-).

    We switched from SuSE primarily because of a lack of support from Novell
    even though we were in their partner program.

    I've never been particularly fond of Red Hat distributions, but far less
    fond of the debian varieties (perhaps because I grew up on RPM based Linux
    systems). Given that in the 42 years I've been pushing computers for a
    living, I have rarely found any vendor support worthy of the name, and that
    I know people heavily involved in CentOS, I figured that was preferable.

    Bill
    --
    INTERNET: bill@celestial.com Bill Campbell; Celestial Software LLC
    URL: http://www.celestial.com/ PO Box 820; 6641 E. Mercer Way
    FAX: (206) 232-9186 Mercer Island, WA 98040-0820; (206) 236-1676

    Few skills are so well rewarded as the ability to convince parasites that
    they are victims. -- Thomas Sowell

  20. Re: OT: Linux Distros. Was Re: Confirmation of at least 5 morelayoffs.

    On Fri, 8 Feb 2008, Bill Campbell wrote:
    > On Fri, Feb 08, 2008, RedGrittyBrick wrote:
    > >Bill Campbell wrote:
    > >>
    > >> We have moved most of our clients to Linux over the years, originally
    > >> Caldera, then SuSE, now CentOS,

    > >
    > >Out of interest, why the switch from SuSE to CentOS (and not RHEL)?

    >
    > This could be the start of another religious war :-).


    Yup...

    > We switched from SuSE primarily because of a lack of support from Novell
    > even though we were in their partner program.


    I have always used the mail lists. So that has never been an issue. I
    love SUSE Linux. I am currently using OpenSUSE 10.3.

    > I've never been particularly fond of Red Hat distributions, but far less
    > fond of the debian varieties (perhaps because I grew up on RPM based Linux
    > systems). Given that in the 42 years I've been pushing computers for a
    > living, I have rarely found any vendor support worthy of the name, and that
    > I know people heavily involved in CentOS, I figured that was preferable.


    I agree. I really dislike Red Hat all though I do use them were the
    applications and customer's dictate it. I found CentOS to be too much
    like RHS. So I have stayed with SUSE. I have used it since it's first
    release. I previously used Slackware. SUSE being a Slackware derivative.
    I find SUSE/OpenSUSE to be a bit more polished.


    --
    Boyd Gerber
    ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast