Is it just me, or is there a clear difference between the writing styles in the "pro-SCO" and "pro-IBM" camps? I've noticed every time someone writes an article that seems to support SCO and Darl McBride, they use a lot of analogies. Those who support IBM or support Linux in general are left quoting specifics and offering concrete data. As examples of the former camp ("pro-SCO") I cite: -- This article. "Have you ever watched a divorce..." -- McBride. "There is no Free Lunch...", -- Howard Strauss at Princeton. "Free, 0% APR, Better Sex, No Effort Diet", Nigerian Money Scams, and yadda yadda. In any case, it's refreshing to see such a unbalanced and biased article on the issue of SCO vs. IBM. Oops, did I say that? ...J