Pepe wrote:
> Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
>>
>> There is a difference between people needing assistance and SCO the
>> company. Don't you think people that need to run the SCO OS's need
>> assistance. Or are you just the to hell with everyone not running
>> something other than an SCO OS. Are you a fanatic?
>
> Those who chose to go with SCO and paid for their OS, should get the
> support they need from that company, which, you know, runs a business
> for profit(TM).

Yes, for the last 3 years it's been based on suing Linux developers. They lost
and are now bankrupt.

> The time to take responsability has come. So said company is a
> dead-man-walking unable to provide support, all because of its own
> faults and mismanagements? Too bad.

Hey, we're not helping *SCO* per se, we're helping each other.

> I'm not a fanatic. What made you wonder that?
>
> I am asking, why provide free technical support for a company which
> deserves nothing good?, for a company which sacked the one providing
> said free technical support? I think it is a rational question, and not
> a question of fanaticism.

Well, because if we're obviously doing better work, it supports the open
source models of open source and community support, it helps *our* business
models. It's certainly helping mine, and I'm tryihg to pay back to the SCO
user community the assistance they've given me.