Opinion: Now if only SCO wasn't such a loser. There are two real reasons that OpenServer can't win a recommendation.
Despite all the pounding Ive given SCO lately, Im actually very fond of SCOs products. The companys policies are another matter.
You see, Ive been using SCO operating systems for almost as long as Ive been using computers.
I cut my teeth on Unix with SCO Xenix on 4.77MHz 8086s systems in the mid-80s.
By the late 80s, I was working as a system administrator using first Interactive Unixa company that would be merged into SCO3.2 and then 4.0 to run Sendmail mail servers and majordomo mailing lists.
By 1990, I was using my first graphical PC Unix: SCO Open Desktop.
Ive also long recommended SCO OpenServer as the best x86 Unix bar none.
Then, Linux came along. By January 2001, when Linux 2.4 came along,
the handwriting was on the wall.
Unix on Intel had long been a niche product, but Linux was bigger and better.
That is not to say though that SCOs latest and greatest, SCO OpenServer 6,
isnt a fine operating system. It is.
Heck, Im running it myself in my lab, and its a great operating system.
While eWEEK Labs analyst Jason Brooks would take Solaris on Intel and Windows Server 2003 over it, if it was just about the technology, Id go with OpenServer.
OpenServer has always been the most stable operating system Ive ever seen on an Intel platform.
People tell true stories about OpenServer servers being literally walled up in closets and then be forgotten about for years at a time. OpenServer just runs and runs and
you get the idea.