Torvalds Tells All 525
Eugenia writes: "Linus Torvalds gives an interesting interview to OSNews.com, talking about everything people are wondering about his personal opinions on several matters: on the GNU/Linux naming, the GUIs currently offered for Linux, the kernel 2.6, his plans for hot-plugged devices & drivers, Microsoft, FreeBSD and the future in general."
Keeping up with kernels (Score:3, Interesting)
The machines I am about to mention are behind firewalls, so don't get your hopes up about exploits. But, I have several machines with specialized equipment that will only work in 2.0.33. They have binary modules, and I don't have the source to them, and the company is now out of business with no further development. This has struck a major blow in my ability to offer Linux solutions (unless I can demonstrate a non-Beta, long history).
Re:Keeping up with kernels (Score:2, Interesting)
They have binary modules, and I don't have the source to them, and the company is now out of business with no further development
The first and best reason not to use any software delivered in a binary only fashion. You should have insisted on an open source license for the drivers or offered to buy access to the source code. Perhaps you can find the original developer, he may still have the code, offer him a job.
Re:Keeping up with kernels (Score:4, Interesting)
>They have binary modules, and I don't have the source to them
Who's mistake is that? Live by the sword, die by the sword, so to speak. Living the proprietary life can be more expensive than most would care to admit...
I personally wish Linus would break binary modules much more often. That way companies would have two choices: Support Linux properly (via Open Source) or go away. I'm more than tired of seeing "Linux Support" on a box when they include nothing more than a crappy binary module. That's almost false advertising: It should say "Supports RedHat running Linux kernel 2.x.y-preZ only" on the box instead.
I no longer buy hardware for my Linux box unless the support is via source code. Even then, I try to avoid certain hardware unless its built into the kernel source tree (I'm not fond of patching the source for storage controllers and the like...). Doing that has kept me sane, and reasonably happy.
I guess that opinions' a little too hardcore. See you in -1 land!
Re:Keeping up with kernels (Score:3, Interesting)
Other than the above statement, you have some insight. I think it's great that say, Nvidia for example, is supporting their cards on linux, even if it's a binary module. Companies should be able to leverage linux's sucess without giving up source code.
I do agree with you though on the deal with it aspect. If they don't release under open source, they can deal with the API changes or not suppport linux. But, to only give them two choices: open source or burn in hell isn't a great way to encourage companies to support our favorite OS, be it open source or closed.
I like the fact you are voting with your wallet, however, when you don't buy something because of zero linux support, do you drop a note to the manufacturer? "Dear Company X: Your product rocks and I would loved to have bought it, however you don't support linux. Instead I chose company Y who does. Have a nice day."
Re:Keeping up with kernels (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Keeping up with kernels (Score:3, Insightful)
people with binary-only drivers, on the other hand, are screwed.
it doesn't do much for folks like nvidia, who have an open-source module layer to load their binary driver.
Re:Keeping up with kernels (Score:2)
OTOH it would be quite a sensible thing for you to consider 2.4, and maybe junk the proprietary equipment, on the grounds that iptables is at least a stateful filter whereas ipchains was only an approximation.
"Now they are talking about 2.6. When will it end?"
Never. Development is good. Taking a flyer and running with something out of development (what package do you use that *hasn't* evolved since you installed it?) is your responsibility/problem/job.
So, what's the problem? (Score:4, Insightful)
On the other hand, if you aren't strictly dependent on specialized hardware, then scrap your old stuff and spend a couple of bucks to buy modern hardware that IS supported.
Choice in Vendors (Score:2, Informative)
I will remember that in the future. However, that is like saying you won't buy a car unless it is American made. There is no such animal -- and so you have no choice. It is like saying I won't buy gasoline unless it is safe for the environment -- guess you will be biking. I was forced to put up with what options were available. Companies purchase things and only later find out how restrictive the vendor is -- by then it is too late.
Ouch! (Score:5, Insightful)
(emphasis added)
Now that has GOT to hurt. The guy that tons of geeks look up to (rightly or wrongly), has just said that he doesn't really give a rats ass about what one of the Big Names keeps going on about.... Definately not what anyone in a philosophical debate wants to hear - people loving your idea is great, people loathing your idea is still something you can work with, but disregard? Ouch.
Re:Ouch! (Score:3, Insightful)
Look at his other answers for marketing. He's only focused on the code. Let others worry about marketing, etc.
Re:Ouch! (Score:4, Insightful)
He's only focused on the code.
Almost.
Linus grants RMS and the FSF kudoes for developing gcc and accepts that the rest of the GNU system is useful in most contexts, but where I find his appreciation lacking is not necessarily in kowtowing to RMS' demand that the system be called "GNU/Linux", but public recognition of just how valuable and critical the entire concept of the GPL ("Share and share alike") has been to Linux kernel development.
Perhaps I'm being unfair, that Linus has mentioned the importance of the GPL to the Linux kernel in public forums and I have simply missed it. But, if I've missed it, then you can bet a lot of other people have missed it as well and a great number of people are ignorant of just how important the GPL has been to this development process.
Re:Ouch! (Score:3, Insightful)
What I would expect more from him is actually seeing the 'big picture', which he states he does not see and does not care about. I think Linux progressed to the point where it also does not matter what Mr. Torvalds sees or cares about.
I, for example, believe that _technology_ of the future will become less obtrusive will have a lot of functionality and will be invisible to the eye. The technological direction could converge the digital and analog devices to become more like living creatures or to carry functions of living creatures (a robot police dog would be interesting.)
Re:Ouch! (Score:4, Insightful)
"Free Software Foundation founder and major developer of the operating system known as GNU/Linux, Richard Stallman"
Major developer? Since when? It sounds like Stallman is going out of his way to co-opt Linux (he emailed [slashdot.org] Taco asking him to link to the story) and Linus doesn't want to play. Good for him.
Re:Ouch! (Score:3, Insightful)
rms does not state that he is a major developer of the "linux kernel". gnu/linux is the combination of the linux kernel and gnu software, which rms did quite a bit to develop.
for a more formal rundown of stallman's position, see this document [gnu.org].
Re:Ouch! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Ouch! (Score:2, Interesting)
what one of the Big Names keeps going on about....
Why should he care? Torvalds doesn't have an argument with RMS and RMS doesn't have an argument with Torvalds! LINUX = KERNEL. All Torvalds works on is Kernel, is Linux. Linux is not GNU/Linux.
RMS wants distributors of complete UNIX systems to call their stuff GNU/Linux.
Why is Red Hat called "Red Hat Linux", and not just "Red Hat"? To let you know that it's using the Linux kernel. But they use the entire GNU operating system too! The C library, the compilers, the linker, the text, shell and file utils, the shell... are all GNU. Without them, you wouldn't have a UNIX OS. So why not call it "Red Hat GNU"? Well, then you're missing the kernel used in the GNU OS, so to be fair, call it "Red Hat GNU/Linux". Quite simple.
People have just got it into their head that Linux and GNU are the same thing, because they're almost always used together, and unfortunately Linux is a catchier name than GNU or GNU/Linux, so people just say that.
Re:Ouch! (Score:3, Informative)
GNU/BSD/Linux
Then again, to nearly every user, XFree86 is more important than the GNU tools. So Perhaps:
XFree86/GNU/BSD/Linux
Now, I don't know about you, but I'm a big fan of KDE, and without one of the new cool window managers the whole thing would be significantly less interesting to most users, so maybe a family of OS designations:
And for the purists:
Being a un*x variant implicitly means you can run all the stuff to the left of Linux. The only thing that makes this un*x distribution different is the choice of Kernel. Anyone who doesn't like the Linux Kernel is free to use GNU/FreeBSD!
Re:Ouch! (Score:2, Funny)
By doing this, Linus demonstrates that he understands the *nix philosophy better than Stallman. Small, easy to type names are better than longer forms.
Re:Ouch! (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Ouch! (Score:2)
Is it so hard to believe that he has other fish to fry?
You gotta love the focus. (Score:4, Insightful)
Linus on the competition:
I don't actually follow other operating systems much.
Linus on
See my answer about not caring what the competition does
Linus on Linux vs GNU/Linux:
I don't mind what rms calls the system...I really couldn't care less.
Linus on the marketing of Linux in the years to come:
I don't use a marketing eye, I simply don't care.
Linus rules the kernel, and the kernel is good. His ability to avoid distraction, rhetoric and bullshit is highly commendable.
Of course if we all had that kind of focus then slashdot wouldn't have any comments, now would it?
Re:You gotta love the focus. (Score:4, Insightful)
His ability to avoid distraction, rhetoric and bullshit is highly commendable.
He doesn't care what RMS calls it...
...but he thinks his reasons for doing so are invalid.
He doesn't follow other operating systems development...
...but he finds Windows XP and FreeBSD uninteresting on a technical level. Guess he DOES follow them to a certain extent.
Sounds to me like he DOES care about these things.
Torvalds isn't a philosopher (Score:5, Interesting)
Torvalds: You know, I could care less. I don't think anything is going to really change if we discover there is indeed a human nature.
Hobbes: But surely you must account that people do what they do to serve their own ends?
Torvalds: Again, see my answer to human nature. It just doesn't matter to me.
[end philosopher round robin]
The thing is that there is an incredible difference between Torvalds and Stallman. Torvalds told us he isn't a big thinker. Stallman is. Insert Stallman in the above conversation he would definitely give the big thinkers something to argue about.
The reason there so much more contraversy over Stallman than Torvalds is because Stallman allows us to disagree with him. You can't disagree with Torvalds point of view because he doesn't have one. Stallman's view of human nature is directly involved in what we consider today free software. Just like the US Fathers of Constitution view of democracy is directly involved in what is today the United States.
I argue that those of you tuned to your computing terminals without thinking of the big picture--the so called pragmatists--that you have no way of arguing against those who do. And I plead you to not argue when you really don't know what you are talking about.
Re:Torvalds isn't a philosopher (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Torvalds isn't a philosopher (Score:4, Funny)
I don't understand what you are saying.. (Score:3, Interesting)
THAT is what open-source is about... so many seem to miss that.
See point 5 as well, about competition. Linus says he's not competing with anyone.. just working on linux. He isn't trying to make linux a windows killer.. he's just trying to make it better.
Linus has the RIGHT not to care. (Score:4, Insightful)
The vast majority of Free Software advocates are exactly that - advocates. They aren't developing code, they aren't reading the source to make improvements.
Free Software isn't about anything philosophical. It's about software and being able to share it to build upon itself. After that, it doesn't matter.
Aside from some work in the HURD, RMS isn't a software developer anymore. He has become a philosopher, trying like Socrates to convert others to his way of thinking.
Linus is coding, creating usable technology. It's HIS technology that acted as the catalyst in the Free Software world. Without Linux, GNU would still be a rather obscure name that many computer scientists don't even recognize. Sure, the GNU tools allowed Linux to start off sooner, but there was nothing special about the GNU tools at the time Linux was created -- save that it was free (gratuis), and our beloved Finn could afford them on a student's budget.
The coders have the right to make the names and use them however they please. The philosophers are only being hypocritical by making any attempt at changing that.
Linux doesn't owe GNU anything. The GNU project gave Linux a tiny stepladder. But Linux gave GNU a Saturn V Rocket.
FreeBSD (Score:3, Funny)
Comon.
Re:FreeBSD (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:FreeBSD (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:FreeBSD (Score:5, Insightful)
Softupdates? KSE? SMPng? KQueues? They're all worthy of discussion, and not only that but Linus has discusses kqueues on linux-kernel in the past, and while putting down the BSD interface as being over complex, he hasn't managed to get any similar into Linux last I checked. I'd really like to hear what Linus has to say about KSEs vs. clone() as well. And SMPng is doing some very interesting things with giving interrupts a context so that you can use adaptive mutex locks in them to increase scalability -- I'd appreciate hearing Linus' opinion on those as well.
I have a bad feeling, though, that Linus would take his usual tack of being casually dismissive of what other OSes do, while not really adding anything useful to the larger ongoing discusssion. And I'm sorry if people feel that statement is flamebait, but I've read linux-kernel and seen Linus behave this way. He needs to mature a bit and give credit to other people's work, even though he might disagree with it.
kernels are essentially a solved problem, and future interesting stuff will be going on above the kernel level, not in it.
That's incredibly naive. There's a lot of interesting stuff still to do in kernel development. If you think that kernels are "finished" maybe that is because you're spending your time in the Linux world too much?
Re:FreeBSD (Score:3, Insightful)
I guess it's kind of fuzzy, what exactly the kernel is supposed to do. As far as Linus seems inclined, the kernel should provide a safe interface to the hardware, certain conventional operations (like the filesystem), process control, and not much of anything else.
If that's what the kernel is supposed to do, then it's mostly done and there isn't much interesting left to do. Tweaking isn't generally considered all that interesting (though of course some people are interested in it -- that doesn't make it interesting).
Of course, some people think more things should be added to the kernel than what's already there. But Linus is pretty clear that he usually disagrees with those people, and the functionality belongs in userspace.
Note that he didn't say that there was no interesting work to be done on the operating system, of which the Linux kernel is a small and not-very-interesting part. There's a ton to be done there, but it's being done by the distribution people, not the kernel developers.
I really don't understand why more people don't direct their ideas for cool hacks to libc, which seems a much better level for it. It doesn't seem like anyone's done anything interesting to libc for many, many, many years.
Linus sounds awfully tired (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Linus sounds awfully tired (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe those were the real answers.
He even dodged the "Where do you see Linux in 5 to 10 years" question. Maybe he took some advise from Steve Jobs and decided not to be a preacher.
Maybe he didn't dodge. Maybe he doesn't have a crystal ball and doesn't care to speculate. Maybe he really just likes hacking on the kernel.
Everyone wants an oracle to tell us the future. Maybe he doesn't want to play that role.
Re:Linus sounds awfully tired (Score:5, Funny)
Everyone wants an oracle to tell us the future
Now that would be horrible, but any future from oracle would most certainly involve Larry being much richer, and me being much poorer.(/rtongueincheek)
Don't be so hard on Larry (Score:2)
And he certainly has some fun with his money.
Not that I'm about to buy a 32-processor license from him, mind.
D
Oracle answer (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Linus sounds awfully tired (Score:5, Insightful)
About .NET: That's really not his domain. .NET isn't a kernel service, and he's apparently not interested in it. He seems to be pretty satisfied with where the kernel is, and is focusing on cleaning up and adding in the last features that are really wanted by lots of people (like more scalability). He is interested more in the desktop/ease of use side of things now, because he feels that's where the real innovation and cool stuff is happening these days. And he's right :-) At least that's my take on it.
Re:Linus sounds awfully tired (Score:2)
Then why is he giving interviews?
Re:Linus sounds awfully tired (Score:3, Insightful)
Not tired, wiser... (Score:2, Insightful)
Stop willing to be better than the others, and just improve yourself to be better than yourself, and then look around you to see where you are, you'll be the best. By just looking around first, you miss the chance to see what you can do...
That said, it was a great interview, at least to me!
Big Thinking (Score:2, Insightful)
This philsophy above all others, it seems to me, has kept Linux competitive, developed, and effective. The fact that this sort of stance is impossible to take - or is it? thoughts welcomed - in the business world prove the viability of free software.
Cheers,
levine
Linux on the desktop (Score:4, Interesting)
That is very good news for the eventual acceptance of linux on the desktop. Allowing users the ability to hot swap devices and not have to reconfigure the kernel for new devices will be a huge step towards mainstream acceptance, and it's good to see Torvalds is looking that way.
Re:Linux on the desktop (Score:4, Interesting)
Exactly. Speaking as a luser (bye-bye karma), this is what terrified me about making the leap to Linux (well, okay, not totally: a Linux partition I could screw around with). The average user doesn't want to think about the OS, and generally shouldn't have to. In most cases, the OS should be invisible (though accessable) to the user. This is what "we" want and this is what I love about Linus: he seems to understand that. Also Geek god he may be, but he is actually comprehensible and interesting (in a way that RMS and even ESR aren't). He makes me want to learn more. He makes this stuff fun. End of love letter.
Re:Linux on the desktop (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally, this is my biggest complaint about the kernel as is. It's gotten much much better over time, but once it's really handled for the user it'll be one more relatively large hurdle that a user won't have to overcome. While Mandrake et al. have done a great job on autoconfiguration during install, things like adding a new CD-burner are often done later. It all obviously fits in to his notion (that I agree with) that the innovation will happen in the userspace, among projects like KDE. Autodetection and loading will be another kernel contribution to userspace enchancements.
I'm just glad to see that, while most people gripe about what Linux can't do right now, the people who are actually doing the work are thinking about what it's going to be doing soon. This may frustrate people who just want a perfect system to appear magically before their eyes (as though Windows just showed up in its current form on the day they bought their computer) it'll wind up satisfying a lot of people in the long run. Makes it much more exciting to watch too.
Re:Linux on the desktop (Score:2)
It's a little confusing, but I'm pretty sure that he's not talking about the Windows Device Manager. (Recall that he doesn't really care what Windows does.) In fact he's probably talking about modprobe.
Besides, the Device Manager in Windows is just a userspace GUI* that allows you to look and see what the kernel is doing with your devices. It doesn't 'pervade' Windows any more than whatever userspace support that linux requires for autoconfiguration would.
* Admittedly it did more back with Win95, but modern versions of Windows seems to have dropped pretty much all non-PnP device support.
Is Linus a Randian? (Score:4, Funny)
Linus Torvalds: See my answer about not caring what the competition does, but doing my own thing as well as I can..
Ellsworth Toohey: "Why don't you tell me what you think of me?......."
Howard Roark: "But I don't think of you."
Re:Is Linus a Randian? (Score:3, Flamebait)
And I thought that worked only for the Bible, Koran and other religious texts.
RMS name (Score:5, Funny)
Meanwhile, in an RMS office somewhere:
"Okay, so Windows 2001 it is then."
Re:RMS name (Score:5, Funny)
You mean GNU/Windows 2001.
Re:RMS name (Score:2, Redundant)
"Okay, so Windows 2001 it is then."
No, that's GNU/Windows 2001.
--
Garett
Naming (Score:2, Funny)
Windows is soon to be renamed Closed-Source/Gates/Windows which is far more informative.
He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:2, Interesting)
To quote the "Art of War":
One who knows the enemy and knows himself will not be in danger in a hundred battles.
One who does not know the enemy but knows himself will sometimes win, sometimes lose.
One who does not know the enemy and does not know himself will be in danger in every battle.
He should read it:
http://www.sonshi.com/learn.html
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:2, Insightful)
You're assuming he considers the other competition the enemy. Why should he? He develops linux because he enjoys it, and something tells me he'd continue to develop linux regardless of what the competition is doing.
Dinivin
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:5, Informative)
Competition between MS and Linux is an invention of the markets, not a feature of the kernel's existence. At least, I think Linus is right if he thinks as much.
There is no spoon... (Score:5, Insightful)
It was just kind of cool, and fun.
Then sometime in '97, shortly after the OS/2 regime was destroyed, Linux took on this holy jihad. Now it was a battle, it wasn't just good enough to create something kind of fun and geeky, the goal was to destroy all the infidels from Microsoft.
It was at that point that Linux became no fun to use, and it was no longer fun to be around the Linux geeks.
Linus has the right attitude. There is no enemy.
Re:There is no spoon... (Score:2)
Somewhere there's a nifty little quote pointing out that "*BSD's are for people who love Unix. Linux is for those who hate Microsoft."
It's kinda like the ol' maxim about money: if you wanna be rich, hey, that's great, no problem. It's when you wanna be richer than everybody else that problems start happening.
Linus knows the difference. It's all about making the kernel better. Not better than some perceived enemy, just better. If we take care of better, then better than will take care of itself.
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:5, Insightful)
Whatever happend to that fabled Japanese "business is war" economy, anyway? Oh, that's right -- all those warrior businessmen had a couple of decades of success with their slash'n'burn tactics, then kept going with it and drove one of the world's largest economies straight into the toilet.
There's a lesson here, one which Microsoft and Oracle and Sun should learn really fast: war is about killing people and breaking things, and business (ideally) is about empowering people and building a stable, lasting structure to create good products. These are not only different goals, they're opposite and mutually incompatible goals, and techniques that work for one simply _do not work_ for the other.
I've seen this from both sides, by the way -- I was in the Air Force when A.F. leadership went through a "TQM" craze. It didn't work worth a damn then, and "Sun Tzu's Guide To Crushing The Competition In The Global Marketplace" doesn't work now.
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:3, Informative)
Japanese war (Score:2)
As for 2WW, that can describe the Japanese way of making war.
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:2)
"If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him."
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:2)
The "Art Of War" describes much about speediness, flexibility and strategy. These things, the Linux kernel developers apply in large quantities. There is no lack, there.
It also states that "He who is about to lose his head should not worry about his beard". In other words, don't worry about how you look. That is not going to determine whether you survive or not.
Last, but by no means least, is the section in which he tells his king that either the General is in charge of the army, or the King is, but not both. And that the only successful army is one led by the General. (The result of the King's decision led to one of his favourite wives, ummm, losing her head.)
In this scenario, we have Linus and Bill Gates. Bill Gates is the "King" of the Desktop, but Linus is the General of Linux. By Linus declaring that he won't follow orders from the King, he is declaring that Linux is independent of the politics of Microsoft, and therefore is the superior force.
Maybe you should read it. (Score:3, Insightful)
-=-=-
The ultimate skill is to take up a position where you are formless.
If you are formless, the most penetrating spies will not be able to discern you, or the wisest counsels will not be able to do calculations against you.
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:2)
Linus Torvalds, OS Avenger, strikes out at the evil empire of Microsoft from his hidden fortress. His volunteer resistance fights to free the common man from the clutches of the nefarious Lord Bill Gates and his army of code monkeys.
Uh... no. Linus is just developing an OS. He's not fighting a war.
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:2)
Go back and read your Linux history.. he didn't create Linux to take over anything. It was just a personal project he decided to make available to the world.
The fact that he's maintaining that stance this far into the game is rather admirable, IMO. Weaker individuals would have long since sold out.
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:2)
Indeed, Linux as a revolution or whatever you wish to call it, is a movement that attacks very well formed enemies: the media, the corporations, the government. Linux as a movement has no form, but is rather a collage of microcapillaries of force acted on and acting on people who believe in this 'revolution'. Torvalds is not guiding this revolution, it is a self defined and evolving collection of similar interests, both blind and educated, that seeks to preserve itself in whatever manner it can, for that is its only real interest.
Done Tzu. Try Foucault.
Re:He SHOULD care about the competition... (Score:2)
I'd much rather use an OS from someone/accompany that views themselves as the competition. There's something very pure about that. You do the best you can do, know your own weaknesses, and move to eliminiate them. If the competition is minicking YOU and including YOUR features, that means you're in the lead. You're the top dog.
Coke shouldn't worry about Pepsi. Coke should worry about Coke.
Tells All? (Score:5, Funny)
"And then, when I was in 4th grade, I pushed my sister down the stairs and blamed it on the dog.
But this, this was the worst. I mixed up a batch of fake puke, and snuck it into the movies. I went up into the balcony...."
Now that would be a great interview.
It's so sad... (Score:5, Funny)
Then along comes a guy who doesn't care if anybody adopts his pet project -- which is now the used by a huge number of people all across the planet, and the basis of billions of dollars in development and sales efforts. Hardly fair, is it? ;)
Justice (Score:2)
Interesting Interview? (Score:2, Interesting)
You can't just answer 'I don't care' to 50% of the questions asked...There's a huge difference between not caring, and not having an opinion. Sure, he's not marketing driven, he said as much in the interview, he's only concerned about technical matters...Hoo hah, excellent..But we shouldn't try to pass this off as interesting.
I think the most interesting stuff came at the end
"What's that shift going to be? Who knows. Maybe it will have nothing directly to do with computers at all, just using computers to create new life-forms or whatever.. Where the _excitement_ is not the tool, but what you can do with it."
and with that, you have to respect a man who's ignited countless flame wars with thousands of lines of code
Re:Interesting Interview? (Score:3, Insightful)
In an increasingly market-driven world, I think having someone who knows to look at the job at hand without giving a fig for what others do with it is an "interesting" perspective. Try working as a consultant for a while, you'll see a lot of "don't care" attitudes around, but someone with that focus on what is going to happen is a welcome rarity. It's good to see `market' versus `geek' become separated out more; slashdot should take the hint.
He obviously doesn't want to be interviewed (Score:2)
Very...Buddhist, I think.
He's not a freaking entertainer, get over it! (Score:3, Insightful)
In the hours that it took you to compose enough bullshit to reach the Karma cap, Linus probably answers hundreds of emails, merges some patches, does some testing, etc. He does not, and should not involve himself in every Slashdot-style controversy. That doesn't mean he's a worse person than the average karma whore, but sounds like Slashdot is disappointed he's not trying to become one.
Perhaps the obvious fact he has something better to do hits a bit too close to home among the Slashdot crowd.
Implication: the PC will fade away (Score:2)
I take that to mean that we'll keep seeing more machines running Linux, but they won't necessarily be what we think of as PCs. Things like WebPads, toasters that know Sartre (and can help you with your worldview), bathtubs that know they're full and houses that remember to light up the Holiday Tree/Icon only when it makes sense. These aren't PCs in the classic sense, but many will be running Linux.
And that will be good.
Re:Implication: the PC will fade away (Score:2)
How do I disarm the nuke?
Teach it philosophy.
And God said "Let there be light."
Been there, answered that. (Score:2)
Why the question about RMS calling Linux GNU/Linux? Is this *really* an issue?
Linus sounded tired probably because he thought:"Oh no.. another list of trivial questions"
At this moment there is so little to tell about the Linux kernel. Why bother Linus and other developers with this?
Problems with stupid journalists (Score:2, Insightful)
Do you have a beef with RMS over GNU/Linux ?
Do we have ground troops in Afghanistan ?
Have you had sexual relations with an Intern ?
When will journalists learn to at least ask a good question.
What do you think RMSs biggest contribution to the Open source movement is ?
Who inspires you today, who do you see as your idol ?
What message would you like to deliver to todays incoming college Computer Science Freshmen, what do you think they should be looking at ?
Re:Problems with stupid journalists (Score:2, Interesting)
And btw, we do it for fun, I did not go to a journalist school, english is not even my first language.
I believe that the BSD Interview we had the other day was the best we ever did, and this one was the worst we ever did, not because the questions were invalid, but because Linus wants to play it "a star" and snobbing all of us from really answering the questions asked. His call of course, but don't shoot down the postman.
Eugenia
---
OSNews Editor
Re:Problems with stupid journalists (Score:2)
Give me a break. If you think you can do it better, sign up as a journalist on OSNews and see how deep the rabbit hole goes. Please, you are welcome!
No one was claiming it was easy; but even in the case of trained journalists it sometimes happens that the interviewer and the interviewee are completely out of synch. To be interesting and relevant the interviewer needs to get a feel for his subject; with Linus this is incredibly easy. You can refer to kernelnotes for summaries of the linux developer's mailing list, you can get tapes from the Linuxworld conference roundtable discussions he participated in, and you can look back at the myriad interviews he has done.
Use those references to make your questions mor e interesting; for example instead of the question about XP you might have written:
Not interesting... (Score:2)
Worthy? (Score:2)
Honestly, he talks about Windows and FreeBSD not to comment but to dismiss - he briefly adds that their new features "don't interest him," but really it's not very much info.
this frightens me (Score:2, Flamebait)
*cough*
I could also go on about the "core" code of the VM layer, but AA may finally have whipped that into shape...
Re:this frightens me (Score:2)
Linus Torvalds: I don't actually follow other operating systems much. I don't compete - I just worry about making Linux better than itself, not others. And quite frankly, I don't see anythign very interesting on a technical level in either.
So he doesn't follow FreeBSD much, but doesn't see anything very interesting? The filesystem and VM at least could take a look at FreeBSD. Rik van Riel had contact with some of the FreeBSD developers, but he seems to have fallen out of grace with Linus...
We don't need another hero (Score:5, Insightful)
I have to admit that I haven't been following Linus's interviews too closely as of late, but I do remember reading in 1996 or 1997 (when I first tried to install Linux) about why he created it; he did it for himself.
He wanted UNIX for his PC because he thought DOS was crappy.
He had a lot of people appreciate his idea and even make him a Geek Icon. Hey that's pretty exciting stuff for a young geek to have lots of other geeks look at you in awe.
Eventually the reality of what you are doing sets in. It's not a hobby anymore and you are not doing it for yourself anymore. People depend on you to run their businesses, they want you to lead an OS holy war, so to speak.
Eventually you either let the crowd push you to insanity, or you have to decide not to care what everyone is screaming at you, and you have to remember why you started all of it in the first place.
Linus is right, though, he shouldn't really be caring much what everyone else is doing. Linux should be it's own product and not the "me too" product that it has become.
maybe readers should send list of questions (Score:2, Interesting)
So he annoys the faithful by proving himself morta (Score:5, Insightful)
I never had the misconception he was out to slay the evil Microsoft or other such competitors. He has always been "the author of Linux", nothing more, and certainly nothing less.
This interview simply confirms it, he really is just trying to make it better. He isn't at WAR with anyone, he isn't into that grandstanding.
Maybe a few people here could take a lesson from his interview. Then, maybe you might know what it is all about.
what I want to know... (Score:2, Interesting)
Linus, at the end of the interview:
The next "revolution" is going to be the same thing - not about the technology itself being revolutionary, but a shift in how you look at it and how you use it.
What's that shift going to be? Who knows. Maybe it will have nothing directly to do with computers at all, just using computers to create new life-forms or whatever..
Burn out? (Score:5, Interesting)
I worry about Linus and also Linux. I feel like Linus is trying to disassociate himself from Linux because he has two dynamics at work inside him.
1. Linus realizes that he really is the leader of a large and idealistic movement, and would like to see the Good Things(tm) keep rolling.
2. Linus either feels that he is not the man to lead, or he realizes that he cannot be the leader forever.
His reaction is unfortunate. If he really does want things to keep rolling, he needs to provide for a sustainable method of succession of power.
Linux is a religion these days. Really. It may not have gods, but it has a fiercly defended ideology that really does border on the metaphysical.
Human knowledge is libre is not so much a radical notion, but its particular application to technology is very radical--bordering on the spiritual.
Look at all the major world religions. They have all suffered at some point due to the schisms created by lack of smooth power succession. These problems are inherent to systems where there is one guru.
I hope I'm not decending into troll territory here, but the FreeBSD core team idea is a very good one. There are no succession problems, and the team seems to deal well with changes in staff despite the smaller numbers of people working on the project.
-Peter
2 things folks don't understand about Linus (Score:3, Insightful)
He just wants to make something cool and have fun with it. That's the whole agenda. Linux is not about competion for Linus--and, please, "world domination" is a joke! As others have put it, "Chase the dream, not the competition" [pbs.org].
When he says "Linux", he's usually not talking about the whole system the way most of us are. You say, "well, the only point of the kernel is to serve as the foundation for the rest of the system"; but that's not the way Linus et al think. They mostly want to build a beautiful kernel. Ask a glibc developer if you doubt this. (They'll say Linus doesn't give a flying fig about user-space, which is an exaggeration, but....)
None of this should be a revelation. Read what Linus has said during any of the last ten years.
Excellent shutdown (Score:2, Interesting)
On the other hand, Linus speculated about computers being used to create new life forms. So perhaps he has a little /. blood after all.
Re:Excellent shutdown (Score:2)
Hey, they drive up pageviews (sorry, GNU/pageviews) so /. loves 'em.
Linus and Linux (Score:3, Insightful)
I am not part of the Kernel development team. I have never met or even seen Linus.
With that clarified....
Why should he care?? This started as a pet project in college to him. Does anyone see a distribution of Linux with his name on the cover?? Does anyone see him trying to market Linux in any real way?? I sure don't. He likes to thrash around in the code. He has proven that he is good at it. He makes pretty good decisions about what is the next thing to be added to the Kernel. I think we are expecting a lot of him already. Why expect him to be the person with all the answers.
Linus and Linux are not the same thing. Granted, he started it, but it has grown well past what any one man can handle. Why should he care what everyone else is doing?? He is doing good with the Linux Kernel as it is. He sees where people want to go by what they submit to him and he and his group put it into the kernel tree as they feel it is ready. There is no reason that he should care where Microsoft is going in the future. I know I don't care much. I can't even see a reason why he should care about what the BSDs are doing. That makes a differance to most of us, but why should we expect it of him??
He does a good job at what he is doing. Why should he need to care what anyone else is doing??
Linus distancing himself from the zealots (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, mission accomplished; Linus has pissed off the Linux zealots. Hopefully, when these people find out that Linus doesn't share their religious fervor about the righteousness of Linux and the darkness of the Enemy, they will leave Linux alone so that it can gain some actual credibility.
Good job, Linus.
Gates and Torvalds (Score:3, Funny)
Linus Torvalds: I don't actually follow other operating systems much. I don't compete - I just worry about making Linux better than itself, not others. And quite frankly, I don't see anythign very interesting on a technical level in either."
Doesn't Torvalds sound amazingly like Gates in this line?
"I don't care so much about OS's other than Windows, I just want to make Windows the most innovative product it can be."
BSD- versus Linux people and lamers in general (Score:4, Flamebait)
While the BSD people seem to have this massive inferiority complex and make a lot of noise about how great BSD is and how shitty Linux is, most Linux people, save the trolls on Slashdot, really do not give a shit. They are mostly agnostic. They don't feel the need to say that Linux is superior. It works for them, it gives them something to tinker with and the atmosphere around the Linux crowd is generally more relaxed -- thus fostering creativity.
I work at a company where we use a bunch of OSes. Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, NetBSD, OpenBSD you name it. Usually the OS for solving a given task is chosen depending on what the people who develop, deploy and run the service are more comfortable with. Sometimes it comes down to particular things that one OS does better than the rest.
For instance we use a lot of Linux machines for development work. Why? Because there are more tools available under Linux. Commercial software vendors create things that just aren't available under, say, FreeBSD. Sure you can run them in Linux emulation, but why would you if there os no reason to do it?
Other than being a good BSD zealot and not soil your soul with the unclean and ungodly Linux.
We deploy a lot of solutions that were developed under Linux on FreeBSD machines. Large scale stuff. A lot larger than anything you are likely to see during your entire carreer in UNIX. Using FreeBSD during deployment is a cost issue for us. If you save a few million dollars using FreeBSD for deploying a solution because some aspect of the OS would require more hardware if you ran Linux, then you do that. I can't remember any of the Linux users in the company bemoan this fact.
Likewise, if you can cut development time in half because you have better tools under Linux it would be stupid to use FreeBSD; just because it is the Right OS.
This sounds pretty obvious, right? Apparently it isn't. The last year I've seen two individuals apply for jobs here who wanted a clause in their contract that they wanted to ONLY deal with one OS. (I'll leave it as an exercise to the reader to figure out which OS they preferred exclusively). Given that the BSD crowd is more prone to childish zealotry it didn't really surprise me.
It told me something important though: you really do not want zealots working for you, whether they are one denomination or another. If you can reduce the number of obvious shitheads in your company that is a good thing.
I think the best thing that could happen to the BSD world would be if someone well respected within the communities would step up and tell people to quit being such whiners. It is embarassing to see grown people who are supposedly intelligent act in a way that makes them look like ignorant bigots. That's not to say that Linux doesn't have the same problem; sure it has, but to a lesser degree. Most chest-thumping Linux users are just that "users". Clueless losers akin to the Amiga losers who claimed the OS of the Amiga was the best OS in the world -- but couldn't really tell you what made it so much better except the usual drivel that set it out from MS-DOS 3.2.
I've met Linus once. A few years ago we had dinner and an evening of talking about this and that. What strikes me about Linus is that this guy is probably the best leader you can get for any software project. He is focused and rational.
He is focused on what he wants to accomplish in a forseeable future and isn't easily led astray by fads or hype (unlike most people).
He is rational in the sense that he doesn't give in to emotional pressure but bases his decisions on what he thinks is right. This is important. I have managed open source projects and one of the things that I find very hard is rejecting bad ideas, bad code and bad people when the intentions are good. It is really hard to do. (Tridge [of Samba] said the same thing in an interview not too long ago). This is one of the things Linus does well. His level-headedness and his apparent lack of passion (apparent being the key word) when he reaches a decision is really something that other people could learn a lot from.
Now instead of flaming me: if you are a "guilty as charged BSD chest-thumper", ease up a little. If you are basically a loser who never wrote any significant piece of software or even tried to contribute with some actuall skills that you have: grow a brain or at least try to put some work into maturing your intellect and keeping your passion restrained long enough to stop bullshit seeping out of your face.
Thank you for reading.
MS and war (Score:4, Informative)
But yet is still use MS for my main system at home (At work i have to and i dont have a problem with that). Why ? I will tell you.
I for one am sick and tired of attempting to install applications etc and finding out that this version of XXX is wrong and you need XXX (GCC 2.69 is a good example) you download a package and try to install it only to find out that you dont have this library etc etc, so its download, configure, make in an endless circle.
Last night i wanted to simply install a Div-x Player for Redhat so i can take my home notebook away on holidays, so i downloaded Mplayer and XMPS, whoops dont have this library, go get it, then install, ok, no didnt find the codec, reintsall, nope still an error and i dont have the patience to find it right now, so i try Mplayer - only it wont work with GCC 2,96 which it says is redhats version so go off and get 2.95, copnfigure, make, nope wont work, so i need to read the documentation - only its no help (not im not an amateur here - i have worked with Unix, Macs, Novell and MS products for almost 10 years)
So i thought damn it i dont have time for this, thus i pulled out my Linux HDD and bunged in my Win2k one, installed the codec and im off an running. Easy - took 3 minutes
Why is it so hard to get this level of funcionality in Linux ? The OS has been around for longer and with open source it should be easier ? The thing is Redhat and Mandrake with Gnome and KDE are getting closer and closer to the point where they can be a desktop replcament - Koffice is very good - but as long as installing ANY software requires arcane knowledge of terminal windows and make files and lib dependencies it will never get there - the average home user (ie 90% of them) wont do this.
The problem is this whole MS V Linux crap detracts from the real issue, making linux the best OS for all users and that means functional and simple - this is what is missing here and it breaks my heart.
To Quote: Linus Torvalds: I'm a big non-believer in manual driver and kernel configuration, be it visual or not. Most of the stuff happens automatically, and we're going to make that more and more common. Things like hot-plugging a device and the driver automatically getting loaded is how things are supposed to work, none of this "device manager" stuff
This is what we need - not another (im gonna get flamed for this but - MS Sucks Linux Rules argument)
A few things i think might be self evident now but i will say them anyway (im asking for it here i think but prove me wrong instead of flaming me)
1. There will always be an MS or MS like desktop- in a world without MS then how do we introduce new people to systems (give me a break i could not give my mother linux - i dont have unlimited support time) THERE IS A THING CALLED CHOICE
2. linux will never destroy MS - this is as stupid as the 'war on terrorism' setting out to destroy puts an enemy on the defensive AND people will continue to use MS products
3. The only way to Win market share is to produce a friendly and superior product - i think i have already commented on this.
I Love Linux - i think its an incredible OS and is getting better - but that does not mean i have to hate MS (its an operating system - get over it)
Re:Microsoft vs. Linux Marketshare (Score:4, Insightful)
While I think that ryanf's comments and quotes from Sun Tsu elsewhere in this thread completely miss the point, Linus' head-in-the-sand attitude to the many great and exciting developments that are taking place in other operating systems is a shortcoming not a feature.
There are people in this world who are at least as clever as Linus and they will continue to come up with new and useful ideas and refinements to operating system design. Pretending that these innovations aren't useful to you is not the best way to improve your kernel.
Re:Don't care about FreeBSD 5? (Score:3, Insightful)