The Linux Identity Crisis 364
Jayze Calrtini writes "From an article from ZDNet:"If you've been following the current rift in the Linux community between Linus Torvalds and his minions squaring off against Con Kolivas and the mainstream Linux fanatics, you probably know that it's getting quite heated.
You also probably know that these two entirely different ideas could create three possible paths Linux can take for the future: stay geeky and appeal to the advanced tech guru in all of us; go mainstream and leave the advanced functionality and reliable kernel behind to compete with Microsoft and Apple; or face a "civil war" that could lead to total Linux annihilation."
My Vote (Score:5, Funny)
I mean, with Vista, who cares about Linux anymore?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
No thanks, I'll pass on that pile of doo doo.
Re:My Vote (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
or maybe Abort, Retry , Ignore, Fail [microsoft.com]
In all seriousness, from the article:
It's interesting to me that the liberal arm of the Linux community is trying to play it off like it's not trying to turn Linux mainstream to make money. Sure, some of them say it's to take Linux away from the enterprise and towards the consumer market, but let's be honest with ourselves--it's about the money.
This guys asks about the Linux community "identity". Well, let me tell ya, he is completely w
ZDNet? (Score:5, Insightful)
Another thing the author doesn't seem to realize is that Linux code (the kernel) is forking all the time. It may be support for real-time embedded or support for MMU-less processors, etc. The point is, people experiment, discover something interesting (fork), then try to get the interesting part back into the mainline tree. Happens a lot. Let the code fork in a big way? It will later merge and improve, yet again.
I recommend to anyone covering geek news: Be a lurker for longer than ten minutes and try harder to understand what you're writing about. From the article: "Much like Republicans and Democrats, Linux is dominated by two factions with entirely different ideas." In psychology I think that's called "projection".
Re:ZDNet? (Score:5, Insightful)
More to the point, whether usability is enhanced or not has little to do with Linux, which is just the kernel. The usability issues live or die with the userland and desktop environment stuff, which isn't the stuff that Linus and the kernel hackers spend time tweaking.
So I add another vote to the "this isn't news" position.
Groklaw mentions this new FUD (Score:4, Interesting)
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070921112733615 [groklaw.net]
Really, this supposed infighting doesn't exist, and having these articles on slashdot just helps us be part of Microsoft's mouthpiece. Even if there was a lot of infighting among the kernel developers (there isn't, by the way - not in the sense of a civil war causing total annihilation), all you'd get is a fork and people would move in that direction. I believe that all these articles about Con Kolivas's scheduler are part of this FUD machine and are blown way out of proportion.
For the curious wanting to understand a bit better about Linus's tree not being the be-all and end-all, check out this gentoo kernel page [huihoo.com] that talks about some other branches and unofficial trees.
Re:Groklaw mentions this new FUD (Score:4, Interesting)
It may be that tension is actually helpful to the creative process. Though by the time it gets personal, the useful part effect has usually gone by. We could probably progress even faster by learning better how to defuse, back down, compromise at the interpersonal level. But please, never compromise at the technical level.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's almost made
Re:My Vote (Score:4, Insightful)
I read all the article, and it is, as the tags say a non article. This guy is drowning in a glass of water. If the lkml is indeed being spamed with flames related to this, I would suggest Linus and the others to ignore the flamers and just continue to work. If they (we) want to fork the Linux kernel, go ahead, that is the nature of Open Source.
LKML is not being spammed over this at all. There was an argument over it that lasted a few days but that ended weeks ago. At this point there are more news stories and comments then there were actual posts in the threat that started all of this.
The most laughable part about this all is that Linus never disagreed that work was needed to improve the desktop. The disagreement was over which scheduler patch would help the desktop the most in the long term.
There are some serious misrepresentations of the facts being propagated by some of these "journalists" and they should be ashamed of themselves for their part in this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:My Vote (Score:4, Interesting)
Now, as for DRM nonsense, let me remind you that the libraries you install to allow DVD playback in linux are (arguably, of course) ILLEGAL in the US, unless you buy commercial ones. Vista has built in support for both MP3's (most distros no longer have this by default) and DVD's (at least, in any version with Media Center)!!
Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan boy. I still have my trusty XP SP2 box, and Vista is very bloated, slower to start up, and even more difficult to use in some aspects. But give credit where it is due, some of the enhancements have brought more security and an easier to use Start Menu (oh search bar! then again, there's no frigging Run by default).
Now, if I could just play those Mp3's while I was transferring files, or let the screen saver come up while listening to them
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like Coke or Pepsi, Intel or AMD, Nike or Converse, Apple, or Microsoft?, Ubuntu or Suse, Yahoo or Google?
The soft drink market is doing well along with CPU's, athletic shoes, OS manufacturing, Linux, and search engines.
Linux isn't going away. It may fork, but it isn't going away any more than search engines or soft drinks.
Re:Not FUD - This is What Needs to Happen (Score:5, Insightful)
I do not consider myself a nerd of geek. I use Linux because it works for me, because I avoid vendor lock in, because it is easier to admin and secure.
Re:Not FUD - This is What Needs to Happen (Score:5, Insightful)
Mainstream a Linux desktop, and by mainstreaming, I mean make it commercial. Make it so Joe Notageek, and his grandmother, can install it with less clicks than it takes to install Windows. Provide apps for it.
This is a vastly overblown issue. Normal people don't install OSes. Normal people don't even understand what an OS is. They buy computers, not OSes.
This is the biggest difference between Joe Average, and geeks. To a geek, a computer is a collection of (mostly replaceable) components. To Joe Average, it's an appliance like his microwave, iPod or DVD player. How many people do you know who upgrade the coil in their microwave ?
Reading waaay more into it than is really there. (Score:2)
These guys are complaining about infinitesimally small kernel components causing irreparable harm to the OS as it functions wherever on the continuum from general purpose desktop/laptop to specialized workstations and servers. Are these components important? Yes, obviously. Are the differences THAT catastrophically profound? No. The problem is mostly that project A has one person's name on it and project B made it to release, so the author of A runs around the net screaming that this horrible injustice will
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
First, Kolivas is free to create a kernel for him, just setup his GIT server and he's done. That's what *free* soft
Tagges as FUD because it IS FUD (Score:3, Interesting)
Good (Score:5, Insightful)
Why only 1 fittest ? (Score:5, Insightful)
The article confuses Linus Torvalds' Linux (just a kernel) with distribution.
No matter what Linus thinks, there are still out there very geeks oriented distro like Gentoo and Slackware with "let the user configure himself everything" in one end of the specturm and Ubuntu, complete with its "means 'I can't install Debian' in african dialects" types of joke.
The TFA is just a meaningless rant.
For me the two outcomes are without linux dying, because each variant is fittest for some specific usage pattern (geek vs. joe 6pack). And thus both outcome may happen simultaneously.
Re:Why only 1 fittest ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Great points, DrYak. In addition, after reading TFA, a few important issues were either glossed over, or completely ignored:
1) Mr. Reisinger seems to be suggesting a "two-party" ideology with this issue, using the analogy of conservatives and liberals. What he fails to comprehend, or at least suggest, is the possibility of a "third party". It is entirely possible to maintain the integrity of the Linux kernel while improving the usability of the userspace tools and distributions. The author seems to be so entrenched in the idea that those promoting ease of use in the desktop environment are seeking to take his precious features away, he forgets that the two ends are in no way mutually exclusive. Ubuntu provides an excellent example of how the functionality and potential of Linux can be under the hood of an easy to drive, pretty sexy OS.
2) The majority of patches and suggestions sent upstream have more to do with latency/tasking operations in desktop uses. Tweaking the kernel a bit to cater to those issues does NOT make it less efficient as a powerhouse server kernel, or sacrifice any of it's capabilities.
3) I don't mean to sound pedantic, but I'm not so sure that Mr. Reisinger understands the difference between the kernel and the userspace. Optimizing a distribution to be extremely user friendly doesn't mean that another distribution has to be; that's the beauty of the openness. While there are some who are pushing for the "One Distro to Rule Them All" I would say these are in a minority of the usability proponents; most of use just want to see a Linux distribution fare well in the OS market and offer a real viable choice to consumers.
4) The author seems to forget that Linux will never be consumer-ready or friendly, it's a damn kernel. Joe Blow would have no idea what to do with a kernel, but give him an OS with Linux as the kernel, and maybe he can get going. Linus is protective of his kernel, and I understand why. He's going to have to make some improvements to cater to how people want to use computers IF his goal is to have a widely-used kernel that is free. If that isn't his goal, then he doesn't have to do that, and Linux distributions will slowly go the way of the OS/2 buffalo.
5) There's other great ends to a prolific Linux distro than money. I think the author is completely ignoring the fact that the kernel is GPL'd, and Linus has presented no intention of changing that. Therefore, a realistic usability proponent isn't thinking about how great it would be to see a proprietary Linux sitting next to Vista Ultimate, selling for $499. There's things like vast improvements to the userspace tools, propelling even further the penetration and recognition of free software, and the subsequent push on hardware manufacturers to provide compliant drivers or open their specs. These are all things that excite me a "crazed Linux kernel liberal". But hey, what do I know? I don't write for CNET.
Re: (Score:2)
The history of the last 16 years only shows that linux gets better and better. And i don't mean "change the theme and add a talking dog"-better. I mean that each new version of linux runs better and faster and more stable on the latest and greatest 4-way and the same dusty 10-year old hardware. Linux is still a teenager. It has a long way to go and rumors of "death" really should not be taken
Re: (Score:2)
Bah... (Score:5, Insightful)
Daniel
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
total annihilation of the linux world (Score:2)
I can't wait!
Dude, I'm building a Krogoth.
Re:Bah...' (Score:2)
(1) and (2) can conceptualy be alligned. That's part of the purpose of distros. Many distros help abstract users from all the stuff in
Re:Bah... (Score:5, Insightful)
I, for one, do not welcome our FUD-spewing, bad-software-making overlords.
FUD Machines (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, the Linux kernel is in no danger of imploding any time soon. The community is rather strong and resilient. Really, the big difference is that the development process is visible, as opposed to proprietary software houses where these conversations are inside the walls of the company. The debates we're hearing about are a normal part of development and will eventually lead to a solution that works for everyone.
Desktop Linux vs. "Server Linux" is a total non-issue at the kernel level. The userland tools and interfaces are far more important, and really the only real roadblock right now is a few hardware manufacturers' active resistance to working with free software. This isn't so much a conspiracy to lock out certain operating systems, it's just a way to manage their obselecence cycles to ensure future sales. After all, if customers can keep using that printer until it actually wears out then quarterly profits will see no replacement sales bump when the next Windows release comes out.
This resistance is starting to fray around the edges, and we can see the evidence in AMD/ATI's starting to open up chip specs and Dell's entry into the desktop Linux market. It's beginning to become a non-viable business model to actively impede interoperability with open source software.
Re:Bah... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, it sounds like either 1) a troll or (more likely IMO) 2) A shill. No, make that BOTH a trol and a shill.
I haven't RTFA and I don't intend to. ZD is a Windows-only publication, and has been for the last several years. The only thing they want from Linux users is someone to troll. Christ, thay gave that damned "reader talkback" troll John Carroll a fucking JOB trolling!
Make no mistake about it, ZD net is not about tech, it's not about news, it's not about anything nerdy, it's about PROFIT. And it makes its profits not from sales of magazines but advertising. And Microsoft is one of its biggest, if not THE biggest, advertisers.
ZDNET works for Microsoft. I will not read it; it has nothing of interest for me. I used to be the world's biggest troll biter, but I reformed myself [kuro5hin.org] Fri Apr 22, 2005 at 10:38:29 AM EST. Well, ok, sometimes like any addict I relapse (like I'm doing now) but I'm damned not going to bite ZD's trolls. At least, I'm not going to be trolled any farther than the
stay geeky and appeal to the advanced tech guru in all of us; go mainstream and leave the advanced functionality and reliable kernel behind to compete with Microsoft and Apple; or face a "civil war" that could lead to total Linux annihilation.
Bullshit. Stay geeky? Hell yes, I don't see the command prompt going away any time soon. Having advanced functionality isn't "anti-geek", and no true nerd could ever write such bullshit. And even if a "civil war" happened, there would not be "total Linux annihilation" but a simple and unneccessary fork.
TFA is a fucking troll, fellow Linux nerds. "Linus and his minions?" I never saw "Bill Gates and his minions". Troll!
God damn it, I bit. I'm such a fucking loser! [kuro5hin.org]
-mcgrew [kuro5hin.org]
Re:Total Annihilation (Score:5, Insightful)
Either way, it doesn't matter and we win. If the kernel doesn't fork, then probably some kind of compromise has been reached that brings the best of both worlds. If the kernel does fork, we get two independent projects, perhaps each geared at different requirements.
This has happened before. Firefox started as a fork of Mozilla Seamonkey. The needs of embedded developers have spawned small Linux kernels like ELKS [sourceforge.net]. Ximian started as a GNOME fork that eventually was merged back in. Then there's egcs vs. gcc, and so forth...the list goes on and on.
In the end, the community wins. We get better code, and in some cases, we get new projects that meet specialized needs.
another option (Score:5, Funny)
Don't like the direction the kernel is going? Branch the kernel and call it MyBSD. Whatever, no one is going
to get pissed.
Linux folks take themselves WAY too seriously, and besides, *BSD has a 'cool' factor with the chicks that
Linux will never have. You should see the honeys flock to me when I sport my FreeBSD tshirt.
Come on in to BSD, boys, the water is fine.
Re:another option (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The only OSes slower that I've install on that machine are Windows, Fedora, and Ubuntu.
Could you tell me what a fast OS for a dual core optron or a Core Solo is? I'd really like to know... I can't get BeOS on them, or MacOS, so I can't test those. MINIX maybe?
Re: (Score:2)
I only run FreeDOS and openwrt on my deprecated hardware.
^(this is a joke, my children)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:another option (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:another option (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've got a better idea - branch the kernel and call it PostgreBSD. That is of course unless you want it to have all the speed and functionality of Windows 3.1.
Re:another option (Score:5, Funny)
The thing I like about Linux is the GPL, but I guess I can just add the GPL to MyBSD.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:another option (Score:4, Funny)
sensationalist (Score:2, Insightful)
Both gnome and kde have their irritating features and this - IMHO - is where the problem is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't bother reading it (Score:5, Insightful)
Total waste of time; prevalence of this crap on Digg is why I stopped reading it, and now Slashdot isn't too far behind it seems.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Scheduler plug ins is going to have to happen, regardless of the overhead and effort.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Apparently, windows Vista will halt network communications in order to play back music. Do we need to get linux to that advanced stage of desktop readiness? I don't see why you cannot have both. There doesn't seem to be a need to play m
Agreed (Score:4, Informative)
Next article, please.
Re:Don't bother reading it (Score:5, Funny)
Slashdot needs a "Chop up and feed to the pigs out back" button.
Re: (Score:2)
Slashdot needs a "Chop up and feed to the pigs out back" button.
They do, that's what happened to timothy and michael.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Don't bother reading it (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
LINUX is not an operating system. There is no distribution that is named "LINUX" (that I know of).
It's up to all of us who use LINUX based operating systems to correct people so that when they say "LINUX" when they should mean Redhat, SuSE, Debian, Ubuntu, etc. It's easy, when somebody says "LINUX" unless they are talking directly about kernel you should give them a curious questioning loo
Re: (Score:2)
I would also argue that fights like this are a good thing. They force people to think about prove their position.
Pure flamebait (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
What so wrong with continuing along the path of development that Linux has trod these past fifteen years or so? Looks like it's been pretty successful to me.
Oh, and so now one article by Walt Mossberg has stopped Ubuntu dead in its tracks? Right. Perhaps the kind of people who give credence to trash like this article might be deterred, but if so,
Or... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh the duality of man... (Score:5, Interesting)
A second part of me is wondering why we all can't get along. Linux isn't going to be annihilated. Even if Torvalds were to walk out in front of a bus tomorrow, development of the Linux kernel will not cease entirely. Businesses have too much riding on Linux for it to fail. I could be wrong; but I highly doubt the doom sayer's claims.
Re:Oh the duality of man... (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. Which is why I found the following part of the article so puzzling: "Historically speaking, Linux has never "been about the money," so why should it start now?"
Linux development has pretty much always been directed to some extent by money. IBM and others pour cash and time into Linux because they want it to run well on servers, so to claim that the "conservative"/server faction is less about money than the "liberal"/desktop side rings untrue.
Anyway, the desktop experience is mostly about the GUIs. As far as the kernel goes, there isn't that much that needs tweaking for desktops - mainly the IO and process schedulers. And it isn't that unusual for distros to maintain their own set of patches, so if the worst comes to pass (e.g. kernel has scheduler that won't play mp3s without skipping) the desktop distros will just have to do that job.
Desktop Linux is not just 3D games (Score:5, Insightful)
It is just one tiny facet of desktop linux. Further to this, in order to demonstrate any of the performance you have to throw in two big unknowns - a binary only driver and a card without a fully disclosed and known specification.
Self-serving benchmarks for 3D game on local machines should not be used to claim superiority in all desktop linux tasks period. In fact they should not be considered at all at least until something comes out of the recent ATI and Intel spec disclosures. When non-binary 3D accelerated drivers become widely available there will be a point to start benchmarking towards 3D performance and smoothness. Until then this is a complete waste of everyone's time.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
But I also wonder what percentage of the people being so vocal about the CK affair are just ricers who build everything with CFLAGs set to "-O9 -fomit-instructions" just in case it give them an extra
False Dichotomy (Trichotomy?) (Score:5, Insightful)
more FUD from someone surprised by lkml (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
TFA is mainly not about lkml flamewars, but about a review by Walt Mossberg which might be important to a certain readership in the USA. He isn't very important to readers in the rest of the world. I read the review. It was fairly balanced, he found good points and areas for improvement. The fact that he reviewed it at all is more significant than any findings or conclusions he made.
Quite so. I didn't agree with all that was said in the original review (by Mossberg) but I found the fact that it appeared in the WSJ much more interesting than the review in itself.
I have to confess that I've had pretty much the same kind of problems with Vista (although mostly on the network side and when trying to access the flash card reader) when I poked at it for a couple hours on a new laptop as Mossberg has had with Ubuntu but then I never use Windows while I'm quite familiar with Linux...
In all I
the 90 yard linux playing field (Score:2, Insightful)
developers to play the game professionally.
Do we really need more incomplete, undocumented,
fail-disable, unverified software? The issue
of Linux success is more a question of when will
Linux software become polished, real end user
value? Why do I spend so much time hacking
around fixing scripts that should have been done
right before they were posted? Why am I re-writing
resolv.conf after re-boot to replace the incorrect
(gateway address, not nameserver address) misman
Re: (Score:2)
The scripts and kernel have improved a lot. When I started you were presented with a bash prompt after the CD loaded and had to run fdisk yourself (don't forget to set the partition type) before loading the installer which would just dump a bunch of tar files onto the drive. The X server required entering the screen frequencies manually and then you had to edit the conf by hand to get a decent s
say it with me children (Score:3, Informative)
Ubuntu is a distro comprising of a linux kernel and userland tools/libraries. Why would going the "ubuntu" route would involve any changes in the kernel is beyond me. Ubuntu is nothing more than a well engineered collection of userspace tools that makes the PC useful, it relies on the Linux kernel to manage the system.
In short, you can appeal to the "mainstream" [also known as the dumbification of society] and yet keep a technically impressive kernel behind the scenes.
GNU/linux. (Score:2)
The kernel will always be to complicated for grandma, and there will be lots of distributions. Always. Maybe someone can make a linux for grandma, and maybe it takes as long as your girlfriend being a grandma. It will be the distribution that will be simple or complicated. Not the kernel.
In a comment linus said: I don't care.
Re: (Score:2)
I just want to point out that the dumbification of society applies to geeks who buy cars with good warranties rather than cars that are easy to work on, and geeks that buy non-stick pans and who cook on electric stoves, and myriad other geeks who do mainstreamy sort of things.
Geeks will call a particle physicist an idiot if he can't find his way around his
Sounds like things are just fine.. (Score:2)
Advanced functionality != Reliable kernel (Score:3, Interesting)
Would help if the author knew what the trade-off was. Servers are simple. They maximise throughput fairly. Then there's desktops, which are supposed to remain responsive to mouse and keyboard and audio events even under high load. The latter is more complex. It is the one with the "advanced functionality", and it loses reliability in the process.
There are geeky people in both camps. Geeks who want a server, and geeks who want a desktop.
The geeks who want a desktop want advanced functionality at the expense of reliability, and since the entire hypothesis of the article falls over in the first paragraph, I'm not sure why I bothered to continue reading
Then it continues with crap like If we want unstable systems, we can buy a Windows box.
NOBODY, not even windows users WANT an unstable system! I want a good opensource system that will run reliably and efficiently on my desktop. By the same logic I could say "if we wanted a reliable server, we could just use BSD".
Con Kolivas wrote some nice patches. I'm still yet to see if the CFS is as good.
Vaporous Hype? (Score:5, Insightful)
This looks like vaporous hype designed to try and make linux look unstable. Didn't Con Kolivas say last july [apcmag.com] he's leaving linux kernal development?
How did this make the
there there (Score:2)
OMGWTFBBQ (Score:3, Insightful)
Am I just jaded or does this seem a wee overdramatic? Total destruction of Linux? Civil war? Yeah.
Three outcomes? (Score:3, Funny)
Really good make-up sex between the parties.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Sensationalist article with no evidence (Score:4, Insightful)
That's quite a leap to make without giving any evidence at all. The article first mentions Con Kolivas' spat with Linus as if that is some kind of indicator of Linux's future when it means very little. It makes the assumption that CK's scheduler was more techinically advanced than Ingo Molnar's scheduler. That isn't the case. I don't think the author understands the reasons behind Linux choosing CFS over SD. It was more about maintainability than anything else. It was a decision that took into account long term issues instead of just short term emotions people had for CK and his scheduler.
When did this become a Republican/Democrat issue? Maybe I'm showing my bias here but how in the hell is the "liberal" wing in Linux all about making money? Isn't that the domain of Republicans? If you think that Linux really is split into a liberal wing and conservative wing the comparison would make more sense if the roles were reversed. Conservatives want this to be based about money and the free market. Conservatives would rather have corporations like HP choosing the direction of Linux based on their needs. Liberals are more worried about their rights with the software and abuses taking place by the corporations.
Even without taking the phoney political comparisons into consideration this article is an anti-Linux fluff piece with no meat at all. There is no critical thinking involved at all. It's purely an opinion without any facts to back it up. I wish garbage like this would stop showing up on Slashdot.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes you are showing your bias and what is worse you are contributing to what you say you hate.
Desktop Linux isn't making money, server Linux is. I doubt that Desktop Linux will ever make money but will instead allow a top to bottom Linux stack with companies making money on the server and embedded ends.
What gets me
Divide and conquer. (Score:2)
I don't see what the big deal is about this. (Score:5, Insightful)
Fud Article (Score:5, Insightful)
This whole thing scheduler issue and Con thing regarding focus on the desktop is rather funny.
This is linux we are talking about here, don't like the direction feel free to change it. If no
one will listen patch your own kernel and call it my ultimate desktop edition. It certainly would
not be the first time a focused distro has been developed.
Bottom line, there is no rift in the community somebody cried because there scheduler got beat out. I assume this is because it did not make the cut for some reason, however if I wanted to run Con's scheduler I would just patch my kernel and run it.
Fork to TWO paths (Score:2)
and, one for the mainstream user.
its surprising you already didnt do it. you should not need fight for it. you need to create 2 subprojects.
Move along people... (Score:3, Insightful)
Total Annihilation (Score:2)
It's Taco Time (Score:2)
You would think it would be so transparent that he would be embarrased, but no - that does not seem to worry him.
So, Keep the anti Linux Fud coming Taco, no one seems to notice!
Option Four (Score:2)
There is no reason to give up advanced functionality or stability.
Maintaining a stable kernel is not hard considering it is change that creates instability. Advanced functionality can be available through the command line or even GUIs.
The kernel functionality is good. What is needed is better usability, especially for configuration and management of non-kernel OS components.
I would love to put a better face o
Utter crap (Score:4, Insightful)
It confuses Linux (the kernel) and the CK/CFS spat with the various distributions of GNU/Linux, Gnome and KDE and their usability issues for non-techie types.
There is no risk of a "civil war" and one, certainly, would not bring total annihilation. At most, there would be the threat of a fork and some distros offering a CK patched version of the mainline kernel. I would like to be able to start up my machine with a choice of schedulers or, better yet, as someone pointed out, starting my servers assigning different schedulers to different processors according to their workload.
But all of this has nothing to do with how grannies use their Linux boxes.
Whatever you are going to do Linux, (Score:2)
I don't get it (Score:3, Insightful)
Why... (Score:2)
Checkout Groklaw: FUD Alert! (Score:5, Insightful)
However, if you think about it, there are several thousand Linux developers, and with that many developers, occasional arguments are unavoidable. The same arguments happen within Microsoft software development, except that you don't read about them on some kernel development newsgroup, and the press doesn't pick up on it.
Why do idiots persist at creating a problem..... (Score:3, Insightful)
Like the BSD/GPL licensing issue that was used in a failed attempt to create a problem that did not really exist.
Matt Dillion of Dragonfly BSD clairified it... There really was no issue or concern...
Whats this gotta go this way or that way crap now?
There is no spoon....feeding..... there is forking for the masses...
So fork the fool wants to creat a problem that really doesn't exist...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've never understood why some people believe a registry is conceptually different from a filesystem hierarchy, as in /etc. They're the same thing. On the technical side, however, the registry is actually worse, since you need a specialised tool to edit it (and thus you can't edit it in a practical way when the system is in a bad state and only basic tools are available).