Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Linus on Linux in 1994 400

Vrallis writes "Ten years ago this month, Linux Journal christened their maiden issue with an interview with Linus Torvalds. It is definitely worth the read, and worth some reflection on just how far Linux has come in the last decade."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Linus on Linux in 1994

Comments Filter:
  • Funny quote (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:27PM (#8545242)
    "In 10 years, there will be a linux oriented website capable of taking down the server this interview is hosted on."
  • by slipnslidemaster ( 516759 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:29PM (#8545269)
    ...Beowulf Journal.
  • by ArmorFiend ( 151674 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:29PM (#8545273) Homepage Journal
    ...and worth some reflection on just how far Linux has come in the last decade.


    Since then Linux has traveled around the sun ten times but its still in the same old place. :P
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:32PM (#8545308)
    I guess that's what happens when you run servers on Linux, instead of stable, guaranteed solutions like Windows and Unixware
  • by kompiluj ( 677438 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:32PM (#8545309)
    I'm curious if anyone remebers the Linus - Tanenbaum: polemics [oreilly.com].
    Of course Mach is a great idea: WIndows NT/2000, NeXT, Mac OS X, OpenDarwin, etc. but Linux is not dying...
    • lol... I love your signature... but how can one post any earlier while actually having read the article? I mean... every slashdotter is loading the page during the first 5 minutes... I think I never saw those "loading arrows" in FireFox spin for so long...
    • by rixstep ( 611236 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:59PM (#8545614) Homepage
      Don't include NT/2K in the microkernel club. NT might have started that way, but the bloat code in Redmond made Cutler change his mind pretty quick.
    • Andrew who?

      I think the discussion of Micro-kernel versus monolithic kernel is academic at this point. Monolithic kernels have been made more flexible through the use of loadable modules. Window has shown that no matter what kernel you start with, you can still produce an unstable, insecure, and all around broken OS. If you try hard enough.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 12, 2004 @09:01PM (#8549011)
        Oh, come on now. Andrew Tanenbaum is an absolute legend, he is a fantastic educator, and his books are absolutely brilliant. He had a point in that Linux was using an old architecture, and would have been better designed as a micro-kernel. But what makes Linux shine is not its architecture, but the fact that it is GPL'd, and the fact that it has been developed in a software Bazaar as opposed to a Cathedral. It's unfortunate that Tanenbaum is now remembered by the Linux crowd by this debate - Andrew's argument was correct, but unfortunately completely missed the point of Linux (a point which wasn't obvious at the time, not even to Linus himself).
    • by rm -rf /etc/* ( 20237 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:07PM (#8545692) Homepage
      None of those are really Microkernel's in the true sense though, they're pretty close to linux. The difference is that linux has a big kernel that has a lot of stuff built in and can dynamically load drivers, whereas OSX/XP have big kernels with a lot of stuff build in and can dynamically load drivers.

      Wait, that's the same thing...

      OSX specifically was based on mach, but it's really a mach microkernel with a bunch of stuff rolled into kernel space to make it faster, thus not a true mach microkernel.
    • Wow. (Score:2, Interesting)

      A lot of the arguments supporting Linux in there are now used by Windows supporters. Things like "All the software I want runs now" and the like.

      Rolled in there with greater portability and flexibility, I guess Linux's focus has changed in ten years. I think that's probably the most important thing to note.
  • Bill Gates: "Linus who?"

    -m
  • Summary (Score:5, Funny)

    by Burgundy Advocate ( 313960 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:34PM (#8545330) Homepage
    For those who don't want to read the whole damn thing:

    "In 1994, Linux was mostly a toy OS. Really not much of anything more than a bootloader. A shell of an operating system."

    "Ten years later... well, it's basically the same thing, but it's been ported to every damn computer out there!"

    :D

  • Heh heh (Score:5, Funny)

    by MalaclypseTheYounger ( 726934 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:34PM (#8545341) Journal
    Christening the maiden. Why does that sound so very naughty to me?

  • by Rupan ( 723469 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:36PM (#8545356) Homepage
    Now I wasn't around for kernel 1.x, but I certainly have extensive experience with 2.4 and now 2.6. I even used distros back in the day that were based on 2.0 and 2.2. I cannot believe how far Linux has come - just take (for example) Gnome. I used to use the console alone because the two main WMs - Gnome and KDE - were klunky and not very usable. The text rendered horribly even at higher resolutions.

    In addition, with the recently added hotplug functionality it is no longer necessary to know the exact specs for your hardware in some cases - it is automatically detected and supported.

    It still has a ways to go though. Second-generation hardware is still not supported well enough yet - for example, ACPI doesn't work properly on my A7N8X Dlx. The system randomly crashes with it enabled and generates a ton of interrupt errors.

    I am really quite impressed with the new functionality of the 2.6 series kernels. I think I'll go off and upgrade to 2.6.2 now...
    • Do it. It's worth it. My Vaio feels like a new computer.
    • by hackstraw ( 262471 ) * on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:23PM (#8545844)
      I'm not flame bating here, but what does Gnome have to do with Linux aside from the fact that its one of many programs that can run on Linux? From the Gnome about [gnome.org] page, it mentions Linux twice with "or UNIX" right beside it.

      The same would go for KDE (I have KDE running on a few students' Sun workstations).

      What I think is impressive is that Linux is supported by many big vendors now like HP, IBM, Dell, SUN (wtf?), etc. I'm impressed that there are many nongeek household items that come with Linux powering them like the Tivo, Linksys wireless routers, wall mounted digital picture frames, etc. I think its impressive that the thing that I played with in my dorm room and in the physics labs at school now is my career. I'm impressed with the number of archetectures that it runs on. Currently, its alpha arm arm26 cris h8300 i386 ia64 m68k m68knommu mips parisc ppc ppc64 s390 sh sparc sparc64 um v850 x86_64. I'm impressed that when I went to the SuperComputing 2003 conference that Linux was pretty much _the_ OS to run clusters. I really think that Linux is a Good Thing(tm). It just happened, it works, and its not going anywhere.
    • by monique ( 10006 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @05:09PM (#8547043) Journal
      To pick a nit, Gnome and KDE aren't window managers, and there were tons out there for a long time -- fvwm, twm, you-name-it-wm. Man of them predate linux.
  • by deviantonline ( 542095 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:36PM (#8545374)
    that swear count is hilarious!

    i think its funny that people put profanities in their code, but i think its even funnier that someone codded a program to look for swear words in code!

    lol

  • Penguins (Score:4, Funny)

    by MooseByte ( 751829 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:36PM (#8545377)

    "and worth some reflection on just how far Linux has come in the last decade."

    Well for one, penguin awareness across the globe is way up.

    • ...used to be, you only heard about penguins in two places: Nat'l Geographic and Bloom County. Now? They're damned near everywhere (and not just because Animal Planet showed up in the interim, either.) OTOH, Linux is a lot like that particular animal:

      * Few really and truly understand it from top to bottom.
      * It appears to be a helpless critter and an easy target, yet it happily survives in conditions that would kill most other creatures.
      * ...And finally, Penguins and Kernel hackers both stay out of the

    • Re:Penguins (Score:5, Interesting)

      by BaronAaron ( 658646 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @05:15PM (#8547135)
      Found this post in the Google USENET cache ... Funny...


      In article ,
      BOFH wrote:
      >On 16 Oct 1995, Christopher Choi Chung wrote:
      >> Hi,
      >> Here's a silly question. Does Linux have a unofficial Mascott?
      >
      >If I remember correctly it's a Platypus.

      Well, the platypus is certainly one of the unofficial ones. There are
      other ones: some people advocated the seagull (it can be found on some
      of the logos floating around), and others liked the 3D shark-logo
      somebody made.

      I personally like penguins, but I seem to be in a minority of one.

      Linus
  • Hrm. (Score:2, Interesting)

    I notice from the swearing chart that the number of occurrences of the word "shit" has gone up in kernels 2.6.2 and 2.6.3. What happened? Did they get some new psychotic core developer? Heh.
  • by FePe ( 720693 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:37PM (#8545388)
    What is your "best guess" of the number of machines ruing Linux worldwide today and what would you base an estimate on.

    Linus: I actually have no good idea at all: I haven't really followed either the CD-ROM sales or any ftp statistics, so it's rather hard to say. I guesstimate a user base of about 50,000 active users: that may be way off-base, but it doesn't sound too unlikely. The c.o.l. newsgroup had about 80,000 readers according to the network statistics back before the split (and I haven't looked at the statistics since), and I saw a number like 10,000 CD-ROMs sold somewhere. Not all of those are active users, I'm sue, but that would put some kind of lower limit on the number.

    Here is a article [linuxjournal.com] from 1994 from Linux Journal about the DECUS conference.

    I also once enjoyed reading an account of the early days of Linux by his near friend. I just can't remember the link or the name of him.

    • ...if he was thinking "I'll take over the world, any day now..." I'm sure he'd have given up long ago. If you start talking numbers, you immediately start talking about the competition. And as far as I can tell, he hasn't cared much about that, ever.

      Even if he could have predicted what Linux would be today, I think he (and everyone else) would have a hard time guessing what Windows (admit it, 2000/XP line is a big step up from 95/98/ME *shudder*) and OS X (Apple? BSD based?!) would be like as well.

      For bei
    • by FePe ( 720693 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:09PM (#8545710)
      Here [liw.iki.fi] is the account by the friend I was talking about, and BTW his name is Lars Wirzenius [liw.iki.fi].
  • slashdotted (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:38PM (#8545402)
    Linus (rhymes with shyness) Torvalds (author of the Linux kernel, see box) traded e-mails with us for several days in January giving us his views on the future direction of Linux (rhymes with clinics) and his ongoing role in its development.

    Linux Journal: Ken Thompson was once asked, if he had the chance to do it all again, what changes would he make in Unix. He said he would add an e to the creat system call.

    How about you and Linux?

    Linus: Well, Considering how well it has turned out, I really can't say something went wrong: I have done a few design mistakes, and most often those have required re-writing code (sometimes only a bit, sometimes large chunks) to correct for them, but that can't be avoided when you don't really know all the problems

    If it's something I have problems with, it's usually the interface between user-level programs and the kernel: kernel-kernel relations I can fix easily in one place, but when I notice that the design of a system call is bad, changing that is rather harder, and mostly involves adding a new system call which has semantics that are the superset of the old and then leaving in a compatibility-hack so that the old calls still work. Ugly, and I avoid it unless it really has to be done.

    Right now I'd actually prefer to change the semantics of the and write() system calls subtly, but the gains aren't really worth the trouble.

    Linux Journal: The most consistent compliment that Linux receives is its stability on Intel PC computers. This is particularly true compared to ``real Unices'' that have been ported to the Intel platform.

    What do you see that was done right in Linux that is causing problems for these other PC Unices?

    Linus: There are probably a couple of reasons. One is simply the design, which is rather simple, and naturally suits the PC architecture rather well. That makes many things easier. I'd suspect that the other reason is due to rather stable drivers: PC hardware is truly horrendous in that there are lots of different manufacturers, and not all of them do things the same (or even according to specs).

    That results in major problems for anybody who needs to write a driver that works on different systems, but in the case of linux this is at least partially solved by reasonably direct access to a large number of different machines. The development cycle of linux helps find these hardware problems: with many small incremental releases, it's much easier to find out exactly what piece of code breaks/fixes some hardware. Other distributions (commercial or the BSD 386-project which uses a different release schedule) have more problems in finding out why something doesn't work on a few machines even though it seems to work on all the others.

    Linux Journal: Have you heard of any problems running Linux on the Pentium chip? Do you expect any?

    Linus: I know from a number of reports that it works, and that the boot-up detection routines even identify the chip as a Pentium ("uname -a" will give "i586" with reasonably new kls, as I ignore Intel guidelines about the name). The problems are not likely to occur due to the actual processor itself, as much as with the surrounding hardware: with a Pentium chip, manufacturers are much more likely to use more exotic hardware controllers for better performance, and the drivers for them all won't necessarily exist for linux yet. So I've had a few reports of a Pentium PCI machine working fine, but that the kernel then doesn't recognize the SCSI hard disk, for example.

    From a performance viewpoint, the current gcc compiler isn't able to do Pentium-specific optimizations, so sadly linux won't be able to take full advantage of the processor right now. I don't know when gcc will have Pentium-optimization support, but I expect it will come eventually (most of the logic for it should already be there, as gcc can already handle similar optimization problems for other complex processors).

    One interesting thing is that the "bogo-mips" loop I use to calibrat
    • Re:slashdotted (Score:3, Insightful)

      by caluml ( 551744 )
      Linus (rhymes with shyness)

      No it doesn't. Pretty much every country in the world says the Lin in Linus like the Fin in Finland. It's just the US had Snoopy for a while, and hey, if it's on TV it must be right. Right?

  • by Sqwubbsy ( 723014 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:39PM (#8545406) Homepage Journal
    ...is it really about the story or just trying to show how slash whips phpNuke's ass?
  • swear count (Score:3, Funny)

    by KingJoshi ( 615691 ) <slashdot@joshi.tk> on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:39PM (#8545408) Homepage
    well, fuck aint as popular as it used to be, but there's crap and shit all over. It's spreading more rapidly than our holy penguin!
  • by BillsPetMonkey ( 654200 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:39PM (#8545420)
    The site admins just finish blowing out the candles, and slashdot blows out the server.

    Our work is done here ...
    • You just made me think of that scene from Absolutely Fabulous... when it's Edinas 40th birthday and she blows out the lit candles with a fire extinguisher (and the cake goes with it too).

      On a seperate note, I loved question in the article asking Linus if he wanted a free subscription to Linux Journal... oh the irony!

  • by Anonymous Coward
    although some people may find the link about the word count of the various "swear words" in the linux source tree amusing, i do not. it's not that i have a problem with swearing, i just don't think that's the place for it.

    i know that when i do coding, i try to make sure that not only the code itself is of high quality, but also that the comments are informative and useful -- not vulgar.

    i just think that it's a childish thing to do.
    • by FreeUser ( 11483 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:09PM (#8545704)
      ...then I'll take some heed as to your notion of "appropriate" or not with respect to comments.

      Linus et. al. have created an operating system I have used for over a decade and made over a million dollars using. If they find a little harmless humor or expressive freedom in swearing on occasion in the comments of their code, more power to them.

      Saying "this implimentation if f*cked and needs fixed" is (in context) informative even if it is vulgar, and, quite frankly, it is their code, not Disney's (or $CO's).

      i know that when i do coding, i try to make sure that not only the code itself is of high quality, but also that the comments are informative and useful -- not vulgar.

      i just think that it's a childish thing to do.


      It is no more childish than chiding someone who has put countless hours of hard work in for your benefit because their linguistic aesthetic differs from yours.
    • by The Man ( 684 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @06:42PM (#8548020) Homepage
      Get over it. When you've been reverse-engineering some broken piece of crap for 16 hours straight and finally figure out the exact way in which the documentation is wrong, it's not quite enough to write "/* The documentation says this value is in bits 16-22 of register 4 but it's really reversed, XOR'd with 0x16, and located in bits 20-27 in register 7. */" I mean, this is the kind of stuff we deal with, and quite honestly something like that warrants "/* Sun engineers like to fuck goats while on crack. You can tell because the documentation says... */" If you don't like this, don't read it.

      Another argument is that the rumours (I didn't read the code myself) that flew around when the Windows code got out were that there was rampant profanity in it as well. This isn't to say that it's ok to do because Microsoft does it, just that it's probably nearly universal to swear in comments about broken hardware/software/whatever and the difficulties associated with working around it.

      Honestly, I'd be worried about software that didn't have profanity in the comments. Mostly I'd assume the authors either trusted the documentation about everything (in which case it won't work) or just avoided completely doing the hard work (in which case it's a useless academic project) or perhaps just don't have a sense of humour (in which case I feel bad for them).

  • sco's crap (Score:5, Funny)

    by jas79 ( 196511 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:41PM (#8545445)
    notice the sudden increase of crap in 2.4.2 . that must be when they add the stolen unix code.
  • by Random BedHead Ed ( 602081 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:42PM (#8545448) Homepage Journal
    Gotta love it:
    Linux Journal: With the end of the road for Intel's 80XXX series chips in sight (although at least a few years away), what chip or hardware platform would you like to see Linux ported to?

    They asked Linus this question in 1994. And are we all using Amigas and DEC Alphas? Nope. I wonder what assumptions that we're making these days (x86_64 will take over the desktop, Microsoft will keep losing market share to Linux, Slashdot will eventually get redesigned, etc.) will end up being dead wrong, and funny when you look back. Maybe all of the above ...

    • Keep an eye on PowerPC. If Windows ever takes a significant market share hit I think PPC could become the dominant desktop architecture in a relatively short time. (A few years, maybe.)

      But I'm not putting any money on this.
    • by EvilTwinSkippy ( 112490 ) <yoda AT etoyoc DOT com> on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:41PM (#8546029) Homepage Journal
      Ok, I present the following predictions for 10 years out.

      First off, only geeks will be using desktop computers like we know them. Everyone else will be on a dumb terminal to a mainframe, or a computer that in knitted into some other product (like your stereo or your car.) Data plugs are going to be as common as electrical plugs (in some buildings they already are.) Indeed, I see a convergence of the two for small appliances.

      A quasi-religious organization will spring up around technology. In that theology geeks are the clergy, who are here to introduce the common man to "the clue."

      The US Economy will shift to a socialist system. The socialism will create an entitlement to heath, education, even public transit. The private sector, no longer having to pay for these things, will suddenly realize they can hire a lot more people. People realize they can work for a lot less money. Well, at least following the meltdown of housing prices during the real-estate crash of 2009.

      • A quasi-religious organization will spring up around technology. In that theology geeks are the clergy, who are here to introduce the common man to "the clue."


        bow before me, for I am root.
    • Damn. I remember reading a Byte magazine from 1994. If it was to be believed:

      1) A plethora of CPU architectures (MIPS, SPARC, PowerPC, and Alpha) would replace x86, and compete against each other.

      2) We'd have fully document-oriented interfaces thanks to technologies like SOM and OpenDoc.

      3) We'd be running fully object-oriented microkernels built in C++ (Taligent).

      Yet, the up-and-coming technologies of today are: a rehash of the 8086 (x86-64), a rehash of UNIX (Linux), and fucking *Java*...
  • Linux (Score:5, Informative)

    by Vexware ( 720793 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:44PM (#8545469) Homepage

    It's quite amusing to consider how far Linus' operating system has come, how big it has become - to the point of challenging the multi-billion dollar corporations - when you think that at the start, Linus himself had said Linux wouldn't "be big and professional like gnu". Or to quote the original USENET post [google.com]:

    Hello everybody out there using minix -

    I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and
    professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones. This has been brewing
    since april, and is starting to get ready. I'd like any feedback on
    things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat
    (same physical layout of the file-system (due to practical reasons)
    among other things).

    I've currently ported bash(1.08) and gcc(1.40), and things seem to work.
    This implies that I'll get something practical within a few months, and
    I'd like to know what features most people would want. Any suggestions
    are welcome, but I won't promise I'll implement them :-)

    Linus (torvalds@kruuna.helsinki.fi)

    PS. Yes - it's free of any minix code, and it has a multi-threaded fs.
    It is NOT protable (uses 386 task switching etc), and it probably never
    will support anything other than AT-harddisks, as that's all I have :-(.
    Heh.
    • Re:Linux (Score:5, Interesting)

      by FePe ( 720693 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:56PM (#8545589)
      It's also interesting to read some of the other early posts by him (and other now famous persons). This [google.com] for example. Or this list of this early posts [google.com].
    • another gem (Score:5, Funny)

      by Pengo ( 28814 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:12PM (#8545730) Journal
      In article peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
      >adam@flammulated.owlnet.rice.edu (Adam Justin Thornton) writes:
      >> I'm frustrated because I'm too cheap to buy a decent OS for my 386 and GNU OS
      >> isn't out yet and I have to run this silly little loader called MSDOS.
      >
      >Well, check out comp.os.minix. As the Arch-OS/2 fiend Peter Busser has informed
      >me, there's a 386 kernel called linux under development in Finland. You need
      >MINIX to bring it up, though.

      Happily this isn't true any more (needing minix, that is). Linux /can/
      be used without minix, but it's not a tool for a user yet. Hacker-
      material (ie I've got gcc, uemacs etc, but no real utils). Wait for
      Hurd if you want something real. It's fun hacking it, though (but I'm
      biased).

      Linus "finger me for more info" Torvalds
      (torvalds@kruuna.helsinki.fi)

      ---------
      Hehe, I wonder if he is still waiting for Hurd to do something real.
  • by amigoro ( 761348 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:44PM (#8545477) Homepage Journal
    Linux has created two classes of people. Those who can, and those who can't

    It is not a problem with Linux per se. It is a problem with the culture. The Geeks [mithuro.com] spend too much time trying to show non-Geeks how uncool using Windows is, instead of trying to spread gospel, so to speak.

    Today, the schism between these two classes is so great one views the other with hostility and mistrust. This is not how a society should evolve.

    What should be done in the next ten years?

    • De-mystify Linux
    • Understand that Linux is superior to Windows, but Linux users are not superior to Windows users.
    • Stop saying how bad windows is. Say how good Linux is.
    • Thing is, the geeks are wrong.

      Remember the DVD authoring article of yesterday? One dood got his +5 informative for a longwinded explanation of how to do it, which involved about a dozen complicated command lines to type.

      Try to explain to anyone other than a linux zealot how that's superior to the two or three mouse clicks it would take to produce with Ulead MediaStudio, or Adobe Encore (the first of which shipped with my burner anyways).

      Security, sure, reliability - arguably - I've had linux crap out pl
    • by imr ( 106517 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:00PM (#8545628)
      Stop saying how bad windows is. Say how good Linux is.
      I propose saying how free linux is and that that is what makes the big difference at the end of the day in how it is good as a system and in how it is good as a community.
      • by AntiOrganic ( 650691 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:53PM (#8546150) Homepage
        I propose saying how free linux is and that that is what makes the big difference at the end of the day in how it is good as a system and in how it is good as a community.


        Do you think your average user cares about this? Chances are he's running a pirated copy of Windows already, so he could care less whether or not it's free, and certainly won't bother to make the gratis/libre or beer/speech distinction since he simply doesn't care. What matters is the software support, and whether or not he can quickly and easily perform all of the tasks he's used to on Windows. What also matters is the hardware support, and the guarantee that the TV tuner card he just bought for $20 after rebate at Best Buy works properly with his operating system.

        Of course, the issue with a lot of Linux evangelists is that they fail to realize how Windows is good enough for most people, that people are extremely stubborn, and will only change when forced to. My aunt Kathy doesn't care that Linux is made by a team of volunteers all around the world, or that Gnome and KDE offer many superior features to Windows. She cares that she can hop onto overpriced and under-featured America Online garbage and check her email. This is true of the majority of computer users, not the minority of dumb ones.

        You can preach about free software all you want, but in the end, does it get the job done? And is it enough of an improvement to get people to give up what they've been using for years and learn an entirely new system?

        There is absolutely no doubt that the Linux community has come a tremendous distance even in the last year or so. But we need to fucking work and work and work at improving the quality of the software, and drivers, if it's going to gain any mass-market acceptance. We're not done yet.
      • I propose saying how free linux is and that that is what makes the big difference at the end of the day in how it is good as a system and in how it is good as a community.

        No one cares how "free" Linux is aside from people like us. Windows is free to normal people because it comes with the computer. But I do tell people how bad Windows is. Its probably the 2nd worse OS I've used, next to DOS (if you can count that as an OS). And I'm not picking those because they are from the same company, I'm saying i
    • by greygent ( 523713 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:14PM (#8545743) Homepage
      Unfortunately, you're doing the same damned thing you're railing against:

      The Geeks spend too much time trying to show non-Geeks how uncool using Windows is

      [flame]Geeks are annoying. Most people only want to deal with them when something is broken. Most people don't like being preached to.[/flame]

      (And yes, you can be both a UNIX guru and a non-geek.)

      Understand that Linux is superior to Windows

      By any sane/balanced person's standards, Linux is not categorically superior to Windows, sorry.

      Linux may be simpler and speedier in many situations, but loses to Windows badly in the terms of: available software for the masses, gaming, video work, 3D design, drafting/CAD, audio work.

      Simply put, Linux isn't the right thing for everyone, or perhaps even most people (for other than economical reasons). Recommending Linux to people who are better off using Windows or OS X is going to piss these people off and make them have a very unfavorable view of Linux, justified or not.

      Stop saying how bad windows is

      Quite some contradictory statements you've made there. You might want to rethink things.
      • Stop saying how bad windows is

        Quite some contradictory statements you've made there. You might want to rethink things.


        Nothing contradictory there. Even if you argue that Windows is good, you can also argue that Linux is better. In any case, and in my opinion, it's much better to talk <fill in the blank> up than to talk <fill in the blank differently> down. Think of it in terms of talking about your girl friend, or your religion, or your car. Nobody minds if you think you have a hot girl frien
      • Actually, in some 3D design niches (the really high-end) Linux is better than Windows. That's why a lot of movie studios (eg. ILM) are using it.
    • by goldspider ( 445116 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:14PM (#8545750) Homepage
      "...instead of trying to spread gospel, so to speak."

      Linux would benefit more if people would look at it as simply an OPERATING system, rather than a (religious) BELIEF system.

      There's a reason why Linus has consistently distanced himself from the zealots; they don't represent his personal vision/goal of Linux.

    • by Anonymous Coward
      Linux has created two classes of people. Those who can, and those who can't

      Linux didn't create those classes. I notice the same classes when it comes to many other things: fixing things around the house, working on cars, making things in a wood shop, etc.

      It looks to me like there is a growing class of poeple out there that want everything handed to them on a silver platter sans any sense of understanding.

      Today, the schism between these two classes is so great one views the other with hostility and mis
  • FreeBSD celebrated its 10th anniversary this past november [freebsd.org].
    • FreeBSD celebrated its 10th anniversary this past november .

      Cool, I have occasionally wondered how old the free BSD's were, because I first learned of Linux when trying to learn Unix to help my chances of getting a particular job back in 1994. (I got it, by the way.) I had a couple of "UNIX emulators" which were really just simulators to learn the commands. Linux was the only free real-life Unix I found. At the time I thought BSD was for pay only. I didn't expect much when I downloaded Linux, but after tr
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:50PM (#8545530)
    I was completely riveted by the portion of the interview that detailed the night on which Linus broke into SCO headquarters to steal their intellectual property.

    It's nice to know that 10 years later, he probably still hasn't gone through that entire cache of toilet paper.
    • I was completely riveted by the portion of the interview that detailed the night on which Linus broke into SCO headquarters to steal their intellectual property.

      For those of you who missed the SCO part in the story, here it is again:

      Then there are various interesting projects going on that I'd be very interested to see: [...] i386 SysV binary compatibility (already in early stages of testing)"
  • by jtwJGuevara ( 749094 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @02:56PM (#8545582)
    Due to the pressure that the open source world has placed on Microsoft, the Redmond based giant has announced it will now include a swear count feature to rival that of the Linux survey tool for source code statistics. Betatests of the software have revealed that the source code for Windows XP contains the word 'crap' appears on a scale ten times larger than that of the linux kernel. Most instances of the word crap however, are not located in the comments of the source code, but come mostly from names of most functions, procedures, and objects - thus giving an accurate description of their value.
  • LinuxNews, October 18-26, 1992 [ibiblio.org] (scroll down to the "Interview" section).

    Linus: "I'm most certainly going to continue to support it, until it either dies out or merges with something else. That doesn't necessarily mean I'll make weekly patches for the rest of my life, but hopefully they won't be needed as much when things stabilize." 8-)
  • by CrazyLion ( 424 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @03:38PM (#8545995)
    It's interesting to note that the interview conducted by the publisher of the first Linux Journal - Bob Young, who left his own mark of history of linux. Namely as a co-founder of RedHat.
  • by Isca ( 550291 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @04:50PM (#8546757)
    Linux Journal: With the end of the road for Intel's 80XXX series chips in sight (although at least a few years away), what chip or hardware platform would you like to see Linux ported to?

    And that end is in sight now, right guys?

    Guys?

    ....

    -Chris

  • by krokodil ( 110356 ) on Friday March 12, 2004 @11:56PM (#8549762) Homepage
    In 1994 Linus wanted SysV binary compatibility. In 2004 commercial Unices want Linux binary compatability. How ironic.

Stellar rays prove fibbing never pays. Embezzlement is another matter.

Working...