@Richard C: not sure why no comments but

This topic was created by Alistair .

  1. Alistair

    @Richard C: not sure why no comments but

    CA is so dissimilar to Broadcom that the transaction seems rather odd.

    That earns you an understatement of the (at very least month, possibly year).

    1. jake Silver badge

      Re: @Richard C: not sure why no comments but

      It's all in the bottom line ... RIchard's, not CA's.

      Probably a couple of key software patents, possibly with a related copyright and/or trademark, maybe something in the Mobile Enterprise Storage[0] department or thereabouts. LSI, CA and Broadcom all in bed together. Sounds like a clusterfuck, but the investors might be entertained briefly. Won't be good for FOSS if it amounts to anything, but I'm not holding my breath. Nor investing.

      [0] To coin a phrase. Don't blame me; I'm an Engineer, not a Marketer.

    2. James Anderson

      Re: @Richard C: not sure why no comments but

      Still no comments option.

      There must be thousands of readers like me chomping at the bit to stick one on CA as petty revenge for neglect one once brilliant software packages, thier useless support and price gouging.

      Broadcom shareholders should take note, they may have a massive customer base, but, thier customers hate them.

      As for patents, I don't see it. Having borked an innovative company CA shut everything down, collect the license fees, and piss off the developers so they leave for greener pastures. Any patents they acquired over the years must be outdated by now.

      1. diodesign (Written by Reg staff) Silver badge

        Re: No comments

        Embarrassingly, someone accidentally triggered a bug in our publishing system that prevents comments from opening on the Broadcom-CA story. And our chief BOFH is on vacation.



POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon