Torvalds on Linux and Microsoft

Sniper223 writes with a link to an interview on the Network World site with Linus Torvalds. Linus goes through the usual spiel about stuff like why he released the Linux OS in the first place, and how the future is open source. He also has some interesting commentary on the Microsoft/Novell deal: "I actually thought that whole discussion was interesting, not because of any Novell versus MS issues at all, but because all the people talking about them so clearly showed their own biases. The actual partnership itself seemed pretty much a nonissue to me, and not nearly as interesting as the reaction it got from people, and how it was reported ... I don't actually personally think the Novell-MS agreement kind of thing matters all that much in the end, but it's interesting to see the signs that the sides are at least talking to each other. I don't know what the end result will be, but I think it would be healthier for everybody if there wasn't the kind of rabid hatred on both sides. Some people get a bit too excited about MS, I think. I don't think they are that interesting." An interesting contrast to our earlier conversation.

Discussion

I actually thought that whole discussion was interesting, not because of any Novell versus MS issues at all, but because all the people talking about them so clearly showed their own biases.

That is what a discussion is. A bunch of people giving their opinions, or "biases" as Linus calls them.

Re:Discussion

In no way are opinions and biases the same. I could go on but I'm pretty sure it would act like water on a duck.

Re:Discussion

Jesus, how long do I have to wait before I can post?

I'm sorry, Shiva controls posting restrictions.

Not interesting... Yeah right.

Some people get a bit too excited about MS, I think. I don't think they are that interesting.

"When Microsoft writes an application for Linux, I've Won." - Linus Torvalds

Re:Not interesting... Yeah right.

Not interesting... Yeah right.

I actually think adoption is going at a fairly high rate, but what people sometimes miss is that there's just a huge inertia in switching operating systems, so MS Windows has a big advantage in just the historical installed base...
MS has a really hard time competing on technical merit, and they traditionally have instead tried to compete on price, but that obviously doesn't work either, not against open source. So they'll continue to bundle packages and live off the inertia of the marketplace, but they want to feed that inertia with FUD.
- Linus Torvalds, from TFA

Linus has no illusions about Microsoft's motives or ethics. He simply believes that Linux is the better operating system, and therefore adoption of Linux is a fait accompli, and is inevitable given sufficient time.

That's a fairly typical engineer's attitude, and ignores the enormous damage Microsoft is doing to the computing community while "inertia" is taking its course.

Re:Not interesting... Yeah right.

It's like people who say "I have no interest in politics, I just want to [do whatever]". In Linus' case it is "write software". To many altruistic people it is "help people". To astronauts is "fly". The thing about politics is, even if you're not interested in it, it is interested in you. You either play the game or you bury your head in the sand. If you do, don't be surprised if you don't get to do what you want.

Not Again

"I think it would be healthier for everybody if there wasn't the kind of rabid hatred on both sides. Some people get a bit too excited about MS, I think."

And here we have a perfect example of why Microsoft has spent the last couple of decades utterly dominating their two main markets:

1) Competitors who want to prove to the world that 'reasonable guys' and forever falling all over each other with the same tired old "maybe Microsoft isn't ALWAYS evil" BS

2) Microsoft execs with a laser tight focus to destroy all that lie in their path and merciless action against any who threaten their marketshare and cashcows

Apple(in the desktop OS market), Linux, the myriad failed office software vendors, Microsoft doesn't hate you, they DESPISE your weakness. Reminds me of that Mars Attacks! movie where the humans are open source developers and Microsoft are the Martians, except grandma's record collection isn't there to save you.

It is crap like Linus just spewed that lets things like the Mono fiasco happen to the open source world.

Linus has no foresight

News at 11.

Re:Linus has no foresight

No, if you read the stuff he says, it's clear that he does get it, he just disagrees.

He doesn't think people should have some god-given right to roll their own kernels on Tivos, for example, and he doesn't want to be the one to dictate that right to the people producing the Tivos, either.

On the other hand, though, he's perfectly happy with other people building their own alternatives to Tivos, complete with custom Linux kernels, if that's what they want to do.

Really, though, I get the impression his focus is really on x86 servers, where the software freedom thing isn't remotely as complicated and doesn't extend past the kernel into the firmware.

In all honesty, I can't help but wonder if Linus would've been happier with the MIT license.

I'm not a Linux fan, but...

The one thing he's known for, the Linux kernel, isn't something I particularly like (BSD--more liberal license, Windows--better desktop, Linux? I only use it because of work); but I tend to agree with him on a lot of things. That he would downplay the controversy, and point out that it only illustrates bias doesn't surprise me. He seems to have a gift for cooling things down, for steering clear of immature games and sticking to a clear analysis of the situation.

Whether or not

you like Linus, he is right that the hate for hate's sake between some (and I stress some) Linux and MS users helps nothing. Beyond that, as he is the creator of the kernel, I see him as a parent watching his kid grow up to be something he didn't envision or desire for it. He needs to learn to let go, Linux now belongs to the community.

Linus, Linux

He probably hit on the topics that needed to be public most, for him, and the project. He is very blunt. He probably wants to concentrate on Linux and he's probably tired of people coming to him with fud. I don't think he is scared to say what he feels, he just wants to use his time on what he loves, family and programming.

Kudos for the conservative approach.

Know the battles that need to be fought and disregard the rest. It's a good way to lose precious energy and resources if you fight against everything without knowing what you are really fighting for.

...our earlier conversation.

With whom?

Good for him

You mean Linus isnt a rabid MS-hating fanboy? I feel so disillusioned.

In all seriousness though it is nice to hear someone who actually matters in the open source community coming out against fud that comes from his own 'side'. (as if open source was about taking sides) The zealots who spread fud on the pro-linux side get way too much publicity and really make everyone associated with them look foolish.

credit where credit is due.... Bias where Bias is

Microsoft is credited with breaking anti-trust law and this is not just one case...

The Rieser (sp?) file system creator is credited with what, besides the file system? Killing his wife?

I think it shows Linus's bias to dismiss the illegal activities of Microsoft and to hide it by saying it is the rest of us showing bias.

Linus is not the only one outside of Microsoft doing kernel work, there are plenty others. BSD flavors, BeOS, ReactOS, AROS, Dragonfly (kernel changed enough to not really be tagged with BSD flavoring), Minix, MacOSX, etc...

For those who want to credit Linus with the kernel being used by a lot of Free Software, the fact is that had Linus not done so then somebody else would have, perhaps even the Hurd would have had better development and focus. And not to forget that the same Free Software is being run on other systems with kernels created by others.

If there is anything to realize here it is that people moved away from Microsoft for any number of reasons, I have my own user frustration related reasons and have additional frustration with the industry as a whole. When something better comes along I will move to it, as will others too. It might just be DragonFly.

Beautifully backhanded compliments.

"MS has a really hard time competing on technical merit"
"Microsoft simply isn't interesting to me."
"I don't actually personally think the Novell-MS agreement kind of thing matters all that much in the end"
"Some people get a bit too excited about MS, I think. I don't think they are that interesting."

Why anyone thinks this means he's pro-MS beats the hell out of me.

Re:Beautifully backhanded compliments.

Why anyone thinks this means he's pro-MS beats the hell out of me.

They're very kind things he said about MS compared to what he could have said, things like:

• Microsoft is a convicted criminal monopolist

• Microsoft commonly uses money to extinguish competition in destructive ways

... and he would have been correct.

Always been non-chalant...

It's basicly "I'm over here doing Linux, and I'll keep improving Linux regardless of whatever Microsoft does or doesn't do." That's not just in relation to MS, but seems to be the general case with tivoized kernels, DRM, patents and everything else that's not about improving the code. It's like an athlete saying he's competing against the clock and himself, constantly improving regardless of whether he's far behind or far ahead of the competition.

Usually, that's a very healthy attitude. And if everyone was running their own race, it would be. But Microsoft has proven time and time again that if they can't provide a superior product, they throw all kinds of dirt on the competition. He might not care if Linux is competition to Microsoft or not, but Microsoft certainly does. That's not to say he should start fighting FUD with FUD, but it'd be nice if he showed that he at least understands the game being played.

Microsoft can not kill Linux the kernel, because of the GPL. But there are many ways to kill Linux the market, and Microsoft is an expert at it. Again, I think Linus doesn't care all too much about that, or assume that if only Linux gets good enough the other "distractions" won't matter. Well, I care that Linux can be a mainstream OS that can handle mainstream media, interact with Windows networks and protocols, use common document formats and in general function like a first class citizen. If it's a stunning good kernel too, that's good but it's no good being exceptional at everything but the things I want to do.

What more do I need?

"I live in a good-sized house, with a nice yard, with deer occasionally showing up and eating the roses (my wife likes the roses more, I like the deer more, so we don't really mind). I've got three kids, and I know I can pay for their education. What more do I need?"

...What more do I need?

In a culture dominated by the words "I need more", this question looks erroneously out of place. Greed is so commonplace that to see such an authentic lack of it is refreshing.

Stop your hero worship... nothing to see here...

Just more of Linus running his mouth.

Stop your sycophantic hero worship.

GJC

Blinding hatred.

In martial arts one must keep ones mind clear and focused, free of hatred and emotion. Open source ideology is about embracing freedom, not hating Microsoft. Sure Microsoft are currently a barrier to freedom and by no means should we embrace them like long lost children just because they say something or act a little enlightened. But by the same token we should not shoot friends in the head just because the deviate from our ideology.

By letting an irrational hatred of Microsoft sour the relationship between Novell and the community we face a danger that the newly confirmed copyright ownership Novell has in Unix will be used by them the same way SCO did. Instead of finding a way to educate Novell we have taken a extreme and non productive approach which will tend to alienate not only Novell but any other companies considering working with the open source community.

The fact is that there are many companies out there which may make deals with Microsoft for their own reasons. We cannot expect companies to make a black and white decision about what "side" they are on. IBM for example is acting in its own self interest amd while that self interest is in the interests of the community all is well. But lets not deceive ourselves that they would fight for open source to the bitter end. They would settle. They would make a deal if it meant survival.

Novell may have been in a similar situation, and while I don't like these deals being done its a reality for companies in a way that it isn't for individuals. Microsoft won't sue you for personal use of a patent without a license, but they will sue Red Hat into the ground given the chance. Red Hat may yet need to make a deal if Linux does end up infringing, even if the Linux community can remove the infringement in quick order.

In truth Microsoft is USING our hatred against us. Already the Novell deal may have driven a wedge in the open source community between GPL 2 and GPL 3. Once again we see reactionary actions being driven by Microsoft to their advantage. Linus sees that hating Microsoft is no way forward. We need to examine, evalaute and develop strategies which allow us to define the ball game. Microsoft won when they turned the conversation to Total Cost of Ownership. They won when they got CEO's concerned about legal issues around Linux.

To win we must be more clever, less reactionary, and keep a clear head with a focus on what important; bringing open source to the world.

Linus, you have to stop this now!

Stop being logical. It's got a lot of the fanboys of that big unkempt hairy guy upset.

Same thing could be applied to Linux vs BSD

"Some people get a bit too excited about MS"

Same thing can be applied to the Linux vs BSD debate, shown by the debates followed the report on systrace.

Same thing I've been saying since the deal

"The actual partnership itself seemed pretty much a nonissue to me, and not nearly as interesting as the reaction it got from people, and how it was reported ... I don't actually personally think the Novell-MS agreement kind of thing matters all that much in the end..."

Right on, Linus. It was a tempest in a teapot, mostly stirred up by FSF fanatics who wouldn't think twice about sinking the second most important Linux distro just to prove they're more "moral" than everybody else.

I kinda disagree about Microsoft not being "interesting", though. I understand what Linus is saying because he's focused on his technology and isn't interested in Microsoft. So for him, they're not interesting. Plus, he's confident OSS is the way to go and thus will inevitably take over. I think Microsoft are assholes and a major impediment to improving computer use worldwide - which makes them "interesting" at least.

Which is not to say that Linux wouldn't be the impediment if the market share were reversed - but at least Linux is making improvements. Vista ain't an improvement to Windows and definitely isn't an improvement in the OS space.

In the end, though, we need a serious reevaluation of how software is developed. Because right now EVERYTHING IS CRAP - including Linux. But Linux is at least FREE crap.

Interesting interview on openITis.com

You might also want to check out Linus' latest interview on openITis.com ahref=http://www.openitis.com/openitis/comment_art icles.php?cpath=25&a_id=306%23rel=url2html-4727 [slashdot.org]htt p://www.openitis.com/openitis/comment_articles.php ?cpath=25&a_id=306#> He answers 35 questions put forth by the Indian FOSS community. Super questions, BRILLIANT answers. The interview ROCKS!

Re:can you read me the url please

So Linus doesn't care about a company spreading FUD about systems based on his kernel so they can essentially elicit protection money? If so, then I am disappointed in him.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

Richard, is that you?

Look it up

It's irritating when Linus is given all the credit for the operating system

Wow - another guy that thinks we are using hurd (the gnu operating system) with a different kernel. I suggest looking up the textbook definition of operating system instead of going by "gut feel" or anything anyone in this discussion (including myself) says. It isn't very hard to tell the difference between an application and something that talks to the hardware.

Re:Look it up

Well, for an (Unix-like) operating systems there are two vital parts: the kernel and the C library (few programs communicate directly to the kernel; even language support libraries for other languages tend to go through the C library on Unix-like systems; also the C library is probably the one userspace component which is the most OS specific). The kernel on Linux systems is Linux. The C library is glibc, i.e. GNU. Thus it makes sense to call the system GNU/Linux.

If it were for all the userland tools commonly used, I guess many current Linux installations would be more properly named KDE/X/Linux (although those running GNOME as desktop would be properly named GNU/X/Linux, since GNOME is GNU).

Ok, maybe make it KDE/X/GNU/Linux ... no, that's clearly to long. But then, Linux already has an x, so we can just make that uppercase to properly attribute the X part of it. Also, KDE has the history of simply adding a K to the beginning of everything it touches.

Only problem: Should it now be KNU/LinuX, or GNU/KLinuX?

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

To be fair though, Linux (the kernel) is what started it all: without the kernel, the GNU tools would hardly be as advanced as they are today, because the Linux attracted so many people. Without the GNU tools, well there would be other programs to replace them. There are a LOT more people who can write a userland tool than a kernel. That's why Linus gets a lot of credit, because there are few other people who could have done what he did.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

Arguably, as neat as Linux might have been at the time, it would *never* have picked up speed without a solid set of userland tools on top, so there would never have been a set of tools specifically written for it. Sure, people could've used a BSD toolchain rather than the GNU set, but ultimately the Linux kernel was always dependent on somebody else's userland to carve its space in IT.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

I am no fan of Stallman and I have some gripes with him about demanding only and all free software. But he clearly had created GNU before Linux (the kernel) was introduced and they were working in that direction. Clearly Linux (the kernel) was better than what they were working on and it was adopted by the industry, but let's not forget to give credit where credit is due. Stallman and his followers were the ones that created this whole thing and it would be unfair to put the credit in someone else's lap.

Re:More whitewashing and fence-sitting

Let's see them for what they are: Organised crime. One day justice will be done, Muslims will be obliterated and the world will be a better place for it.
Let's see them for what they are: Organized crime. One day justice will be done, America will be obliterated and the world will be a better place for it.
Let's see them for what they are: Organized crime. One day justice will be done, Jews will be obliterated and the world will be a better place for it.
Let's see them for what they are: Organized crime. One day justice will be done, Gays will be obliterated and the world will be a better place for it.
Let's see them for what they are: Organized crime. One day justice will be done, Blacks will be obliterated and the world will be a better place for it.

Extremism serves no one. And yes I do realize the discussion of Linux and Microsoft is not comparable to the examples above, but you sound no less ridiculous.

Now, now...

MS may be much and some of their tactics aren't what's considered fair competition, but they are not criminals. A criminal is by definition someone who breaks the law. Umm... well, they made some decisions that weren't completely in sync with some monopoly laws in some countries, but that doesn't make them criminals. It's not like they've done anything that hasn't been done before. It's been quite common e.g. to make retailers sell only your product if they want to sell it, or at least offer them more favorable conditions if they do.

Some of their tactics smell a bit like extortion, but putting MS into the organized crime corner goes a bit too far.

Re:Now, now...

What, falsifying video evidence for court isn't illegal? Surely you jest.

Re:Now, now...

They broke monopoly laws. By your own definition, that makes them criminals. Calling them organized crime is entirely accurate. I personally think every exec of MS should have been barred from ever working for a public corporation the minute MS was found guilty. We treat white collar crimes far too lightly- if a person steals $100, they go to jail for years. Someone makes decisions that costs the country millions if not billions, and they get a slap on the wrist and a fine for their company. Its fucking ridiculous- every corporate crime should require jail time for the CEO.

Re:Now, now...

Last time I checked, violating anti-trust laws is a criminal act. Last time I checked lying under oath is a criminal act. What's your definition of a "crime"?

Re:More whitewashing and fence-sitting

More whitewashing and fence-sitting ...which is just not helpful.

Let's see them for what they are: Organised crime. One day justice will be done, Microsoft will be obliterated and the world will be a better place for it.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume your post is deliberately ironic. ...The other possibility is too depressing to contemplate.

Re:Exciting

I've never met anyone that was excited about windows.

Talk to some directX nuts sometimes. They get pretty excited about it.

Re:Exciting

I saw people get excited about Vista.

I think they'd got bored and forgotten about it by the time it was actually released though.

Book of Dick

1. And it came to pass that the Prophet, Holiness and Peace be upon him, did rise up in the morning and despaired.

2. Behold, a vision I have had, he spoke.

3. God has shown me a terrible vision of heretics and wolves amongst the fold, those who deny his Holy Word the Third GPL.

4. And the Prophet went out unto the People of GNU and raise up his hand from the holiness of his loins, for he had been chatting, and said, I declare a holy fudwah upon the heretic Linus. From this point hence, he shall suffer the wrath of the /. masses.

5. And it came to pass that they rose up, worshiping his glory, and put on their AC guises and did post great numbers of words.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

Is that you RMS? still pissed off some student stole your thunder?

Re:More whitewashing and fence-sitting

I think it's ironic that so many people defend microsoft's illegal practices and policies. It's funny how people can see things in shades of grey when associated with a big entity (government or corporation) but everything is black and white when it comes to individuals. Just because MS products are more popular and it may seem easier to use/support MS in some cases doesn't make it more justified. They are a giant corporation who can afford to "lose" some money to competition which is why it's more outrageous when they break the law. Why is their management punished so much less than someone who robs a bank or sells drugs out of desperation? That person who robbed the bank/sold drugs is always considered a criminal eventhough they almost always had way fewer options than a big entity does, eventhough in the long run the robbery/drugs affects way fewer people and the criminal has way fewer options. Why does the big entity get defended more? Is it because the big entity is less criminal or because more people think it's in their own best interest to defend them?

Re:Exciting

I've never met anyone that was excited about windows.

Excited doesn't mean that same as enthusiastic, or thrilled, it can refer to negative feelings as well...I think MS cause a great deal of excitement among the Apple crowd (sorry, the Mac Community) and the OSS crowd..I get excited, but not in a good way, by Windows all the time, so excited I could put my fist through the monitor sometimes. I'm pretty sure Torvalds was using 'excited' as an antonym of 'calm' or 'bored'.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

Oh no, here we go again..

"Linux just made the kernel; it's irritating when he gets credit for Linux"

"Yeah, but at least he made the Kernel -- Gates just made the Basic compiler"

"That's news to me - have you ever heard of this guy called Paul Allen?"

"Doesn't matter - personally I think the Linux kernel isn't all that - I use BSD"

"Screw Linus -- he was wrong about Bitkeeper and Tivo so he's wrong about MS & Novell"

"Yeah, well at least he's not a convicted monopolist"

"Yeah, until M$ stops treating me like a criminal I refuse to buy their software"

Also insert random quotes and mis-quotes such as:
"When Microsoft writes an application for Linux, I've Won." - Linus Torvalds
"640kb ought to be enough for everybody" - Bill Gates

That about cover it? Can we have a non-childish discussion now? If there's any other slime to be thrown, just reply to this post -- let's keep the forum clean for an actual discussion.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

You don't win by sleeping with the enemy.

I disagree with Linus. I think the whole partnership is an extremely negative thing and falls into the same trap that Microsoft pursued through partnerships of the 80s and 90s. The end result was/is always bad for everyone but Microsoft.

In fact, I believe we should be significantly more hostile toward Microsoft because Microsoft is a convicted predatory monopolist that has claimed earlier this year that every user has to pay some dues to Microsoft and they also threatened to kill Open Source, with one of their representatives stating that 2007 was the year of the death of Open Source.

I think Linus is falling into a trap, by virtue of his relationship to many high end corporates, particularly those paying his bills. This is a tremendous influence on him and it is beginning to clearly show.

Microsoft is not the "necessary evil" of the computing industry. I fervently believe that the industry has been stifled in the long run because of what Microsoft has done in being predatory and killing off competition while being a monopoly. It used its power in a criminal way and has created a path down which we may never be able to recover. The hopes are that we can branch and have a 50-50 choice in software or even a 30-30-30. But being 90-10 is not the way to go for any industry. Only through competition with lots of car companies have we been able to produce some exceptional cars that are praised world-wide. Having only one software company essentially stifles all that.

The good thing is that in the short and long term IP will eventually begin to stifle Microsoft because clearly their employees can only produce so much IP each year. The rest of the industry is producing against them in a significantly greater amount, though, maybe not through IP filings but at least through prior art and obviousness. This means that either Microsoft will hit a wall on IP because there are millions of programmers world wide while there are only so many people at Microsoft capable of producing IP worthy of being patented. They also only have so many employees and only so many of those have the jobs doing the development and only so many of those have the skills to create new IP that can be patented. The rest of the world has vastly more people all capable of competing on the IP front.

The other thing that will kill some of their hopes is Vista. Recent, and past, denunciations of that OS have come down hard branding it world-wide as a product that is hostile toward the customer--an adversary of the customer. It can't long endure. The next piece is that DRM in some media is going out the door which was an important locking technology to lock you into Windows. The next bit are that Linux and OSX are growing considerably. This means that people are understanding that there is a choice.

The key to winning this is to educate the people about the fact that there are some solid and wonderful alternatives to Windows. The other thing is to educate them about the DRM, spying, manipulation, and generally bad faith in which Windows has been built to hide the fact that so much spying is going on on the user. Listen, your computer is an extension of your home. You would no more allow Walmart to put a hidden camera in your home to monitor to ensure you are not using stolen merchandise--and hence you should not be allowing Microsoft to install 47+ program on your computer to monitor your usage to determine if you are using stolen merchandise.

When people are educated and understand we all will have a much safer and more protected world free of the nasty privacy stealing immoral and unethical software being installed.

Be loath to accept SP3 for XP as I am sure it also has a slew of technologies to force you to give up XP and move to Vista or live with the same spying nastiness that Microsoft has incorporated into Vista. Be forewarned.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

at the very least you generally need the GNU tool chain to have something usable

The Mac OS X version of World of Warcraft advertises itself as being built by GCC. Do you suggest it should be called GNU/World of Warcraft or World of Warcraft/GNU? Just asking.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

I want to run Unix and when I ask for a command line I want zsh, be it Apple OS X, or Linux. Answer me this, Microsoft fan boys, why do I have to buy a computer with an O/S I will never use?

You seem to be confused. Microsoft don't sell laptops. Your complaint is with the PC hardware vendors that won't sell you a laptop without Windows.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

You seem to be confused. I don't want Microsoft Windows.

I don't recall saying you did.

Most other people wouldn't either if they had any clue what they were buying.

Given how trivially simple it is to buy a computer without Windows, I'm afraid harsh reality blows your fantasy out of the water.

My mother (who is computer illiterate) used a Linux box for years to do her stuff on the internet.

Personally, I bought my mum an iMac. Sadly I was unlucky enough to do so only a month or two before Apple switched to x86.

The big lie you and all the other Microsoft fan boys are propagating is that Linux isn't ready for the desktop because no one uses it. If Linux distros were sold like Microsoft is sold, the world wouldn't end and Linux would have a similar market share.

I don't recall ever making those arguments either.

Linux was ready for the desktop in the last millennium. Plain and simple.

The market does not agree.

If people disliked Microsoft or Windows anywhere near as much as zealots like you thought they did, Apple would own the home PC market and Linux on the desktop would be csondiered even more of an oddity than it is now.

Well...

Why should we care about what you think about it, Linus?

Erm... well, the interviewer did ASK him. That's a good reason for him to think his opinion was wanted.

Re:Embrace Your Buddha Nature

Slashdot worships Stallman.

This is false, although after making an obvious allowance for exaggeration and caricature it might hold true for a minority.

Quite a few posters on these boards are wary of Stallman and some of his pronouncements.

Now, if you say that Slashdot hates Microsoft, you'd be much closer to the truth. IMO disgust and distrust of Microsoft certainly helped fuel the growth of the free software community.

As for Torvalds, I've noticed he likes to tack back and forth on controversial subjects like Microsoft and the FSF, perhaps so that nobody will be able to pin him down. This is perhaps a tendency he shares with US presidential candidates :)

I seriously can't see any difference between Microsoft and the OSS community. This and most of the comments this topic has thrown up suggest that's a fair enough view. Certainly, it's a good enough view and I can't be bothered much with it beyond that point. It's pretty sad when fundamentals like this have to be discussed. This sort of stuff should be sorted out by the time most people reach adulthood.

Microsoft has done some good and so has Linux et al but neither is unalloyed perfection. This should give people something to think about, and instead of picking sides and revving the engine taking time out to soberly reflect could be a smarter course of action. There's plenty of books on stuff like this and examples abound. As I said before, so what? People don't listen or give a damn. Best let them learn on their own.

Nothing lasts forever that is not of the Tao. Nothing. Certianly, not arrogance and vanity, and there's a lot of that flying around with Microsoft and OSS. Windows and Linux are, merely, shadows on the wall. Ghostlike images, flickers of nothing compared to the eternal. Is it pathetic that such things are so concrete in our minds and demand so much loyalty? One day they will be as the idols of old - long forgotten dust. Same shit, different day.

Re:Linus has a massive ego

It's not like anyone asked him a question or something.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

He made the kernel, at the very least you generally need the GNU tool chain to have something usable, plus a couple of other little things.

The term "GNU toolchain" usually refers to their compiler stack (gcc, as, make, autoconf, etc.) rather than their regular userland tools, aka coreutils (ls, cp, du, stty, su, etc.), or other stuff that are more than just "little things", like init and sh. I usually wouldn't nitpick, but you seem way too sure of what you're talking about.

And yes, I believe the original discussion centered on Linus's credentials as kernel author and made no claim that he wrote coreutils or anything else. Writing a functional coreutils isn't that amazing of an achievement, actually - take a look at BusyBox [busybox.net], a single binary that does all the useful coreutils plus (working imitations of) init, sh, insmod, ifconfig, dpkg, wget, etc., so that, "To create a working system, just add some device nodes in /dev, a few configuration files in /etc, and a Linux kernel." Notably, you need nothing from the GNU project, just the two binaries (Linux and busybox).

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

Well he said he made Linux, not GNU/Linux, so you should be happy...

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

Well that's news to me. It's irritating when Linus is given all the credit for the operating system. He made the kernel, at the very least you generally need the GNU tool chain to have something usable, plus a couple of other little things.

Do we all have to have the same conversations about this naming thing all the time?

Re:Exciting-Yawn!

yet bsd.slashdot.org does still exist... I wonder what's up there.

Re:Linus has a massive ego

No one said you should care, but if the interviewer ASKS him his opinion... And ehm... you accuse him of accusing people who disagree with him of being biased or idealistic, but then in your last sentence you imply that YOU don't agree with him, and he should therefore shut his mouth. nuff said

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

"It's irritating when Linus is given all the credit for the operating system."

It's irritating to me when FSF fanatics think a tool chain makes an OS.

It's irritating to me when they want their tool chain name tacked onto the OS name - when KDE and GNOME have just as much right to ask for that since nobody uses an OS today without a desktop. Yeah, yeah, some bozos may be CLI only - lots of luck. And the choice to run servers without a GUI is not relevant to the issue.

What part of "Linus" in LINUX don't you understand? You want it called GNUOS - be my guest. Come back when somebody cares.

Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS?

I appreciate the fact that you were down-modded into oblivion, as is only right and proper. There are times when the bias of the moderators distresses me, but others where I am given cause for optimism. This is evidence that the system does work the way it's supposed to, at least some of the time.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. FSF cultists, please do not attempt to pass the basis of your mind control off as fact.