From owner-freebsd-chat Wed Aug 21 17:40:38 1996 Return-Path: owner-chat Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA21957 for chat-outgoing; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 17:40:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ilms.nla.gov.au (ilms.nla.gov.au [192.102.239.30]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA21952 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 1996 17:40:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gadget.nla.gov.au (cmakin@gadget.nla.gov.au [192.102.239.85]) by ilms.nla.gov.au (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA78056 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 1996 10:36:44 +1000 Date: Thu, 22 Aug 1996 10:40:24 +1000 (EST) From: Carl Makin To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: http://www3.sco.com/Company/Announce/p081996e.htm In-Reply-To: <199608211933.PAA03233@james.freenet.hamilton.on.ca> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-chat@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > In Email, J Wunsch wrote: > > As Marc G. Fournier wrote: > > > From the last time I used SCO...why would anyone want it, when > > > there are *better* (IMHO!) Unix variants out like FreeBSD and NetBSD > > > that have always been free...? > > Well, this is nevertheless an interesting action, and perhaps the only > > right thing they can do, now being faced with MicroSnot everywhere... I thought Microsoft had a controlling interest in SCO? Carl. -- Carl Makin (VK1KCM) C.Makin@nla.gov.au 'Work +61 6 262 1576' "Speaking for myself only!" 'If you want to make your spouse pay attention to what you say... Talk in your sleep!'