Torvalds on Linux and Microsoft 363
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.
Not interesting... Yeah right. (Score:5, Interesting)
"When Microsoft writes an application for Linux, I've Won." - Linus Torvalds
Re:can you read me the url please (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Discussion (Score:1, Interesting)
Not Again (Score:1, Interesting)
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 (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Linus has no foresight (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Re:Now, now... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Now, now... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Not interesting... Yeah right. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:More whitewashing and fence-sitting (Score:4, Interesting)
credit where credit is due.... Bias where Bias is (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS? (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
What more do I need? (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Servers? (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know what your relationship with Linux is but I work professionally as a server admin for a mid-sized company. Proprietary driver updates with each kernel release is a major pain in the ass and often requires you use older kernels while you wait for your vendor (EMC/Oracle/etc) to release an updated module.
I'm not making a political statement here one way or the other. But as the benevolent dictator this is something he could make happen if the server market was his only concern.
Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS? (Score:3, Interesting)
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
Re:Blinding hatred. (Score:2, Interesting)
You were doing reasonably well up to that point then talked about winning. You cannot win. Not today, not ever. Winning and losing is not of the Tao, Buddhism, or martial arts. This is difficult to understand and see, especially in the world as it is but by letting go of arrogance and vanity one may allow enlightenment to develop. There is no substantive difference between marketing, religion, or warfare. They are all the same ways with different names. What matters is correctness, or what some might call god nature or, possibly, professionalism.
My apologies for the egotistical intrusion into your otherwise sound presentation. Words are so imprecise and speaking is so clumsy. Conveying the brightness of a summers day, or the freshness of a cool breeeze is hard enough. It's all so much wind and flim flam when compared to perfection. Maybe I'm getting sentimental but the mechanics and dreariness of business bores me in comparison to the nearly forgotten days of childhood. Perhaps, by developing more of this spirit inside one might begin to develop better ways and unsettle the world less.
Ah, listen to me??? I'll be raving about God next. I'll quit now while I'm ahead.
Re:Linus released the 'Linux' OS? (Score:5, Interesting)
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:Not interesting... Yeah right. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Always been non-chalant... (Score:3, Interesting)
I believe Linus not only understands how the game is being played, but also has a firm grip on what truly does and doesn't matter.
To help put the preceding sentence in proper perspective, I should tell you that I began using Linux as my sole desktop OS at home and as my sole OS at work in 1995 (anyone remember RedHat 4.1?), although, I am not what most people would call a Linux-fanboy. I do prefer using open source solutions, but to me it's simply a personal decision, nothing more - nothing less.
Linus' original objective, as I understand it, was to provide an alternative, and that he did. Should you use it? Should it be easy enough for Grandma to use? Should everyone throw Microsoft out the window (no pun intended, but I will be here all week) and drive MS from the marketplace? Should Linux be as easy (or easier) to use for newbies as Windows? It really doesn't matter. The important thing is that an alternative exists for all who really want one.
Even though I can't imagine running a Microsoft OS today for any reason, I readily admit that I owe Microsoft a debt of gratitude as Windows (we're talking 3.0 here) eased my entry into the world of computers. I had no previous computer experience and clicking on pretty graphics was the upper limit of my technical skills. Over a short period of time, I began to see the limitations of the Windows OS, and the cost of frequently upgrading the underlying OS, not to mention MS Office and other applications, was certainly not a welcome addition to my budget. I began to search for an alternative, and certainly found Linux to be a workable solution for me.
It was a time consuming transition. First, I needed a replacement for the MS Office suite. KOffice, I don't believe, was even on the horizon back then, nor was StarOffice, OpenOffice, or the myriad of choices available today. I discovered Applixware, purchased a copy, and began the ardous task of converting files. No longer could I rely on Quicken for my banking records, so I tried several open source solutions before finally developing a spreadsheet that was easy to use, accurate, and could be sorted in more ways than I really needed. I could go on and on listing how I made the conversion, but the point is that Linus was already successful - an alternative existed for those who really wanted one.
Each day I read comments by rabid Linux fanboys who despise Microsoft, everything it stands for, and anyone who claims it is a good solution for their needs. While I myself am definitely not keen on Microsoft's software, corporate culture, business practices, lack of cooperation with the open source community, or even their name or logo, it really doesn't matter. All open source operating systems and applications exist to prove a viable alternative - and, as Linus understands, that's all that really matters.
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.
Whoa, Nellie! Function like a first class citizen? Linux already functions like a first class citizen by adhering to open standards. Any interoperability difficulties with Windows networks and protocols, common document standards, and mainstream media are caused entirely by Microsoft's failure to function as a first class citizen and their desire to maintain dominance in the marketplace through actions best associated with a schoolyard bully. Linux is, and always was, a first class citizen through constantly promoting open standards and the resolution of interoperability difficulties.
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 does the Linux kernel prevent you from doing? The Linux kernel does not prevent you from handling mainstream media, interacting with Windows networks and protocols, and using common document formats. The only reason peop
Re:Look it up (Score:4, Interesting)
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
Only problem: Should it now be KNU/LinuX, or GNU/KLinuX?
Re:Exciting (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess I may be called a DirectX ntut for that, despite the fact that I spend most of my time coding on SDL+OpenGL, but hey, a risk I am willing to take :)
I wish you guys would be more candid (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Beautifully backhanded compliments. (Score:3, Interesting)
Search for the word "conviction." You won't find it. Why? Because it was a civil trial, not a criminal one, and civil courts do not "convict" anything.
Go find a historical record of a corporation being tried in a criminal court in the U.S. Have fun.