AMD bungs Groklaw some servers

While SCO sticks to its IBM ones

By Nick Farrell

Fri Apr 13 2007, 09:35

ANTI-LINUX bad-boy SCO has made much hay in court claiming that its online nemesis Groklaw is being funded by its court rival IBM. The 'proof' apparently extended to the fact that the site was hosted on ibiblio's ancient IBM servers.

The popular Groklaw site has been experiencing downtime lately because it has been getting a lot of traffic. AMD heard of Groklaw's woes and offered to give them two spanking new servers.

Groklaw suggested that they donate them to ibiblio so that everyone benefited, and so the library now has two AMD Opteron servers.

Now it seems that the only company in this picture that is running on IBM servers, other than Biggish Blue itself, is SCO which runs its investor relations website on one. Of course claiming that SCO is being funded by IBM is just too silly to contemplate. µ

Patents are getting out of hand Software patents are as foolish as trying to catch the wind Thursday, 22 December 2011, 15:22 PM Read more	SCO loses appeal against Novell Novel approach to ‘ownership’ fails, again Wednesday, 31 August 2011, 10:03 AM Read more
Oracle accepts a $2.6bn cap on damages from Google over Android Latest skirmish in the Java patents battle Thursday, 30 June 2011, 16:20 PM Read more	SCO's nemesis announces her retirement Groklaw's Pamela Jones explains Wednesday, 20 April 2011, 11:01 AM Read more
SEC suspends trading in SCO shares Going private the hard way Wednesday, 6 April 2011, 16:29 PM Read more	Sony faces allegations of US Computer Fraud and Abuse Act breach Removing PS3's OtherOS could be a big mistake Monday, 21 February 2011, 18:13 PM Read more

< Previous article| Next article >

Comments

There are no comments submitted yet. Do you have an interesting opinion? Then be the first to post a comment.

INQ White papers

Databases

Network management

Security

Service oriented architecture

Storage

INQ Jobs

Systems Analyst - Project

Systems Analyst - Project L...

INQ Poll

Authorities in several countries raided Megaupload recently, shut down all of its services, seized hundreds of servers and arrested several of its executives on criminal charges.

Do you think the move was justified?

Yes, companies should suffer an immediate death penalty upon being accused of copyright infringement.

Yes, the coppers said the company was breaking the law so it must be guilty.

No, the company and the people accused are innocent until proven guilty.

No, the company had millions of customers who have been harmed by having access to their data files cut off.

I don't care, I never used Megaupload anyway.

View other polls

© Incisive Media Investments Limited 2012, Published by Incisive Financial Publishing Limited, Haymarket House, 28-29 Haymarket, London SW1Y 4RX, are companies registered in England and Wales with company registration numbers 04252091 & 04252093

SEARCH :

Site Credentials:

Business & Technology websites:

Business research resources:

Products:

Investment Market IT websites:

Find out what you are worth:

Salary Calculator

Search for a job:

Recruitment Agency A-Z Directory

Accreditations:

Digital Publisher of the Year 2010

AMD bungs Groklaw some servers

Share this:

RIM Playbook OS 2.0 and Blackberry 7.1 video demo

Nokia Lumia 710 video review