Joerg Schilling wrote:
Hakan Koseoglu hakan@koseoglu.org wrote:
On 11 July 2012 13:06, Steve Clark sclark@netwolves.com wrote:
I think it is more the fact the Oracle seems to be two faced in their
dealings with foss as opposed to IBM. So correct. Way back in 2001, in London I was there when IBM clearly stated they are going to spend one billion on Linux on that year. They
IBM is also two faced with their OSS engagement.
They treat linux different from others.
Well, but IBM *loves* Linux, and I saw that 10-12 years ago. Let me put it this way: you're one of the world's largest companies, and you make a wider range of computers than pretty much anyone, and you've been doing it longer than almost anyone.
Now, would you like to support S/38 (I'm sure some are still running), AS400, RISC6000, AIX, DOS/SP/VME (and I have no idea how many more acronyms have been added since I last worked on one in the mid-nineties), MVS, etc, etc... or run Linux on *everything*, and tell users, when they want to go to a larger system, "sure, same o/s, nobody needs to learn a new system, just recompile your in-house software...."
mark