Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

WSJ Interview with Linus 174

Posted by Hemos from the inform-reform-deform dept.
Thanks to several of our readers who noted the public version of the Wall Street Journal's interview with Linus, conducted by Lee Gomes. Some of the standard issues - 2.4, Linux on the desktop are talked about but the statements concerning ye olde Mindcraft tests are particularly interesting.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

WSJ Interview with Linus More

WSJ Interview with Linus

Comments Filter:
  • ...just because they leave the office? Linus must think so, according to this: "Windows is still a no-brainer for most people," he said, adding it will take Linux "perhaps five or 10 years" to catch up, at least for home-computer users. But he said average business users might move to Linux sooner, perhaps by next year.

    I don't quite understand how it can be as soon as next year, but then suddenly it will take at least 5 years. The users being discussed as *business* are the same people who go home at the end of the day. It would seem to me that it's more likely that if someone uses Linux at work that when they get home they will be familiar and proficient with it already and thus MORE likely to use it, not less. Naturally if they are more likely to use it, then they're more likely to use it *AT HOME* as well.

    I think Linus is way off with his numbers.. It's either going to happen in the next year, or not - take your pick.
  • How many damn binaries whose purpose are completely undecipherable are hiding in wierd places symbolically linked from some other strange place

    With RPM-based systems (RedHat, Caldera, SuSe, etc.), you can find out where a certain file comes from thusly:

    rpm -qf filename

    I know what each system file does and where it is and how they interact, and how brain-dead certain things are.

    Hmmm, but do you know what each and every registry key does?

    If you want a simple-to-understand Linux, one route to go is to get Slackware and install only the "A" and "N" series, installing the minimum number of packages to get up and going on the 'net.

    From an advocacy standpoint, I actually prefer the complexity of Linux. A desert is far simpler than a jungle, but a jungle has far greater diversity. Linux is a jungle, with different programs doing more the less the same task competing in the evolutionary pool of Linux users. Evolution may not always be neet, but it usually generates the most interesting results.

    - Sam

  • First, all you've done is translated the command line tool to a graphical one. The only advantage is that all your options are laid out in front of you. Yes, that helps the user who is unfamiliar with the tool. But take a longer view of the user's lifetime interaction with the computer--it's foolish to optimize the entire machine for the first few minutes/days/months when the user doesn't know what's going on.

    Why not do something like what SMIT does on AIX? Allow the push buttons, but also give access to the direct syntax to be executed? I actually like that a lot when dealing with rather complex commands that are potentially catastrophic.

  • It's funny, I feel the same way about windows. I know how Unix systems work, I feel comparitively lost on a Windows system. It feels much less logical to _me_.
  • That's rediculous. How about this? Windows is a commodore automatic wagon (holden.com.au fer you yanks), and linux is an s2000, not a bloody porsche.

    And an s2000 is useless where your granny needs it- in a carpark and between home and the local pokies. 6 speed, tail-happy if you don't know what you're doing, and easy to stall (light flywheel, revvy, and good clutch). The're both ready for the highway (or sitting-on-top-of-your-desk), but only one is ready for joe schmoe.

    In short, when they say desktop, they mean people who want their computer to be as easy(?) to work as their vcr, and right well they should. I can put a sun ontop of my desk and use it as a desktop, but you go to dell, you buy it, you plug it in, and it works, and you can type letters and play games. That's what they mean by ready for the desktop.

    Gfunk007
  • Absolutely. Upgrading Windows is like trying to move a Windows app from one dir to another. Theoretically, you should be able to just change a few registry keys and be done, but you're almost always better off just uninstalling starting from scratch. Oh well....

  • though I've been a UNIX user for 12 years Piker. 17 years. Back in the days of 4.1BSD on a Vax 11/780. And Unix V7 on a PDP-11/70.
  • This is going to lose me karma, but moderators are being sucked in far too often...

    Statments like the one above (and like the first and last sentence in the comment I'm replying to) have become far too common on Slashdot, when people express "controversial" (such as pro-MS) opinions. Almost invariably, the comment gets moderated to +4 or +5, regardless of its actual merit, as moderators bend over backwards to be "fair" to the poster and their views.

    If a post is truly worthy of attention, even if it goes against the accepted wisdom around here, it will generally get moderated up - konstant [slashdot.org], a member of the Microsoft Borg, often got +4's and +5's - and deserved them as he usually posted informative, articulate stuff.

    I'd like to suggest a new moderation rule - comments containing the phrase "I'm going to lose karma for this" or similar stuff, regardless of their other merits, should be moderated down regardless of their other merits. Hopefully this might reduce the incidence of what appears to be a new form of karma whoring. If anybody agrees with me, I'd even propose altering the moderation guidelines to specifically recommend this.

    I don't really like commenting on moderation at all, but this kind of thing is driving me crazy.

  • Linux is absolutely not ready for the desktop. I have problems running it now at work, administering only 9 boxes.

    Don't worry, you will get better :)

    Be happy for what you have. I can assure you that things are not getting any better in an all MS shop. Oh wow! My NT box made 4 days of uptime! WEEEEEEE! BSOD.

  • >> I don't quite understand how it can be as soon as next year, but then suddenly it will take at least 5 years.

    From my point of view, the PC's in my business need to have 1)an Office suite capable of opening and saving Office documents(.doc, .xls, etc) 2)Web browser and email capability 3) terminal emulation, specifically IBM 3151. Complex graphical applications, games, etc are not used and/or needed on the average PC on my network.

    I suspect there are many others just like myself who only need to provide basic Office, browsing, and shell services on their PC networks. That's why Linux is nearly there, whereas replacing Windows for home use will take longer. Linux doesn't yet have the widespread games, graphics programs, etc. that make Windows popular with home users.

    That, I hope, sufficiently explains the 1-year for business vs. the 5 years for home user difference that Linux was speaking of.

  • But I am praying for the day something that doesn't suck comes along.

    Look no further!
    Just use opera, fast small and very capable and it almost never crashes.
    Albeit the unix version sucks horrible, but it is just beta there.... windows verson works like a charm though
  • I agree with nearly everything you said.

    I think you thought that you were disagreeing with me when you said each has advantages and disadvantages. Actually
    you were echoing my point. On desktops where Linux systems come out ahead in advantages, it is quite ready for the
    desktop.

    I have to disagree with the "average user" idea, though.

    My Dad is an "average user," but he doesn't play games, and he doesn't watch video on his system.

    He uses the browser, word processor, spreadsheet, a database manager (and several DBs) and SMB file and print
    sharing. All of which can be done at least as well (and less expensively) on a GNU/Linux system.

    Why doesn't he? Because the media (and now even Torvalds?!?) tells him he should keep shucking out the bucks to
    Redmond!

    He won't listen to me because "Open systems guys are a bunch of irresponsible longhairs."

    Argh.

    I think you also assume that I want Linux systems to "overtake Windows as a desktop OS". I don't want this any more
    that I want Porsches to overtake minivans as highway vehicles. But I would object to them being portrayed as inferior, or
    needing to "catch up" with minivans because of there lesser grocery toting ability. Especially if I drove one.

    I also agree that "Linux" (actually XFree86) could stand to improve in performance related tasks (notably video and 3D)
    This would make GNU/Linux (which, at this point might be better called GNU/Apache/XFree86/Linux) systems a more
    well-rounded desktop. Not that it would benefit my Dad (the average user) any.
  • Unfortunately I agree. Ok, maybe I'm not as K-l33t as hardcore linux advocates, but I don't think Linux is ready for my desktop, for a few simple reasons. One, which is not Linux's fault at all, is games. The second, though, is the most important: give me standards or give me death! I'm a Unix _user_. I'm also a programmer. I don't think I'm dumb. But what annoys me to *hell* is the apparent (perception, if you want) disorganization, and non-standardization of Linux. Ok, this is probably a flamebait rant...

    Sure, this isn't the kernel...the kernel is a breeze to recompile and modify...it's a joy. But the file system, the programs, are like somebody just dumped their totally messy desk overflowing with papers into your computer. How many damn formats and names of configuration files that need to be hand-edited are there? Where are they? How many damn binaries whose purpose are completely undecipherable are hiding in wierd places symbolically linked from some other strange place. How many different packaging mechanisms are there? Administration utilities? Things that can only be done by bizarre scripts that break when you install something new?

    Maybe I'm just anal, and maybe I just don't have enough experience with it yet, but there is just too much damn stuff to try to cram into your head just to use the system. I mean, DOS and Windows suck ass, but at least I *understand* how they suck...it fits completely within my head - I know what each system file does and where it is and how they interact, and how brain-dead certain things are. Given any random Linux system and it's a Sherlock novel to try to figure out what the hell is going on. I mean, sure, the system works pretty well, whether or not you understand the arcane steps you are undertaking...but I'm just one of those people who *requires* themselves to understand what's going on. And I can't stand using a system that I don't comprehend.

    Sure, this is probably not such an indictment of Linux as a whole...probably I just need to give it more time and everything will magically fall into place. But an ideal system would make sense from the start, and wouldn't give you hundreds of redundant and/or conflicting options or ways to do the same mundane thing.

    Hopefully I put a non-luddite perspective on this. I'm not the elitest hacker, but I can recompile the kernel and applications, and administer servers etc. I'm just totally jaded at the apparent (whether it's real or not, that is the perception a new user gets) lack of standardization and clear ways to do things.

    Or maybe I'm just overly disgruntled by wasting a week putting Linux on this Thinkpad (finally succeeded).
  • There is no Z5, but there is a BMW M5(sport sedan) and X5(SUV).
    --
  • that didnt stop Bill Clinton!
  • Except for the fact that he mentioned the new kernel update being significant, not much was said that hasn't already been known.
    I look forward to seeing the new kernel because Linus says "It is painful for me to go back and use the 2.2 kernel". Either thier have been some major significant updates, or some modifications have been made to make it easier. But just the same old stuff people like us have known for months. Pretty Redundant.

    Just a tack on, people really shouldn't joke about Linus being the leader of "the linux movement", I've got a friend that was ready to rise up against the "evil oppressors of Linux" when we saw him speak at the Linux World Expo in NY in Feb. Hey there was enough of us to do it!

  • Just ignore the stuff you don't like (Score:3)

    by drift factor ( 220568 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:31AM (#844680)
    He also said that, by not having a staff, he can ignore the sorts of routine administrative details that would bog him down.

    I want a job where I don't need a staff because I can just ignore the stuff I don't like!

  • Am I the only one who considers Linus one of the most accessible leaders in the tech industry? The man is like the Finish brother in law I never had.
    You have to get the WSJ's point of view here - Linus has never gone out of his way to speak to reporters, and probably never will; he is not a "good source" for the reporters as he doesn't need their approval, so won't pander to their needs for snappy soundbytes and copy they can edit however their editor wants the story slanted this week.
    --
  • Should have hung on for the Z5 though, less barbie & ken.

  • Finnish Karate Champion...and where would one come across this useful tidbit of info? For some reason geek gods and karate champions aren't exactly on the same end of the spectrum in my mind...but hey, more power to him :)

    -=MeMpHiStO=-

  • Small mistakes, but well-written overall (Score:3)

    by Idaho ( 12907 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:38AM (#844684)
    There are some more catchy phrases in the article, like talking about 'the first major release in one year and a half'. Just like there is 'a' release. Okay, for the kernel this is true, but I'm not really interested in new kernels anymore. All my hardware works already, so I'm more interested in new versions of, say, XFree86, KDE, Gnome and the like.
    This may also be a symptom of the author thinking of Linux as an OS like Windows which comes in a nice shrinkwrapped box, containing everything (M$ thinks) you need.


    But overall I think the article is very well-written. I certainly like to see things like this in the Wall Street Journal:


    Meanwhile, his creation has become so popular with programmers that it represents one of the most serious competitive threats to Microsoft's influence of the software industry.


    :-)

  • Maybe because about 95% of secretaries are female? It may not be just but it is a fact (or at least a reasonable guestimation).
  • Yeah, getting it do do anything worthwhile is a real "brainer". Wanting to use it is a no-brainer in the sense of requiring no brain (as opposed to not requiring a brain) ;)
  • I'm still convinced that the Mindcraft benchmarks were rigged, in the choice of hardware if nothing else. Complaining doesn't do a lot of good, though, so best to fix things and get on with it.
    Judging from his comment on 2.4 versus 2.2, I think Linux is progressing from hacker-class to enterprise-class. Maybe I'm reading too much between the lines, but it seems like Linux has gone from struggling to arrived, with the gratious comments regarding Windows placating someone who is no longer a contender.

  • Linus's wife, Tove, is some kind of european death-goddes karate champion, so don't talk bad about her or she'll kill you.

    I remember a great interview with his parents, where his dad was talking about how all he ever thought about in school was getting laid.

    Now THAT is the kind of guy I want heading up my OS development.

    --
    blue
  • Actually that would have been the only point of the article as to target a different audience. I really dont know why it made it to Slashdot. Esspecially under the context that it did. It was nothing special.
  • He uses the browser, word processor, spreadsheet, a database manager (and several DBs) and SMB file and print sharing. All of which can be done at least as well (and less expensively) on a GNU/Linux system.

    SMB, hell yeah. Not just as well, but better. But browsing? Better than IE on Windows? Is there some other Linux browser that I'm unaware of?

  • This was actually a very good article, despite what those nitpickers say. The simplifications in the article were necessary to give information about the current situation to the general (non computing public.)

    A) When the guy said a new release of the Linux operating system was going to be released, he was correct in not talking about the kernel. People (specifically the target of the magazine, investors) have gotten to understand the term operating system, and while using kernel would be more accurate it would have detracted from the article.

    B) When the guy simplified and said that MS tests showed Linux was better than Windows, he also had a point. Instead of talking about how pure TCP/IP throughput was less, he focused on exactly what these tests meant to the average investor. To them, it meant that Windows beat Linux, and was thus better. However, he correctly stated that Linus and the other had taken notice of those problems and fixed them.

    C) When they said that Linus only concerned himself with the technical details, not the UI, he was correct, though not accurate. Most people consider the UI just as part of the OS as the kernel. To them, it would really complicate things (especially in an investment journal) if they talked about how X was a seperate library, and GNOME was the GUI and all. They simplified it, and just stated that Linus didn't deal with the GUI, which is in fact true.

    Now many of the things stated in this article were inaccurate, but they all seemed to be correct. I would have gotten into more detail about the tests, and not blanketed by saying "Windows was better" but in the end, a lot of people precieved it that way. Though he didn't use the correct terms, or accurate details, the overall impression that he gave satisfied his intenets (to show prospectives for Linux companies to investors in rise of a new release) and gave the right impression about subjects like Linux's involvement with the GUI and the MS tests.
  • Ok, moderators, since I said pro-RedHat and, even worse, pro-MS things, I expect to lose heaps of karma. Do your worst.

    It appears that it's impossible to exceed a karma of 50 points. And those fifty points are rapidly collected, often from the things that you feel are most inflammatory.

    I'm relatively new to Linux; though I've been a UNIX user for 12 years (I was on the Internet before hypertext), my RH6 installation was my first ever experience as being logged in as root.

    Teething into this thing for the past few months, I've got Apache running, Samba, Xwindows with AfterStep and Gnome, all the while firewalling my DSL connection from my home LAN. Now, I'm working on a webserver for my work, a division of Litton. I've been living and breathing Linux (RH6 and now 6.2) for this time.

    It's had its ups and its downs, and I'm glad to see that someone else agrees with me. For my desktop machine, I'd be perfectly happy with Winodws 95B if it didn't crash all the time, and if I could make one window not steal focus from another. But Windows as a server? No way.

    Linux on the desktop? Not yet. Soon, but not yet. Fortunately, Linux appears to have evolved the opposite way from most other operating systems, with sophisticated technical features in place, secure and fully developed, as the user interface and software base starts to mature.

    As for the choice of Red Hat, well, for a Linux newbie, it has everything I need, all the support I need is just a few mouseclicks away, and hell, there are even books on RH6 in the discount bin at the computer book store. From everything I hear, SuSE and Debian are probably technically superior, but that does me no good if I can't figure out how to get my network cards working.

  • Linus Torvalds, overseer of the Linux movement.

    Now is the time to rise up brothers and sisters, the movement needs you :)))

  • The wall street journal wasn't meant for you. As far as an investor is concerned, GNU+KDE+X+kernel=Linux. All the development that has been going on behind the scenes really doesn't count. What matters is that a new version of the OS (which is a decent simplification of the concept of the kernel, especially in a monolithic system) is forthcoming.
  • One of the major tenets of a big application and its development is full and complete documentation of it before you even write the first line of code... Why do you think things struggle with the interface so much, people tend to just hack code before really considering globally the implications of somethings

    Exactly. The freewheeling lack of centralized control that makes Linux such a hacker's paradise (and therefore gets it into servers everywhere) is also the number one liability blocking its adoption into a desktop environment.

    Silly questions, like who will be the standard desktop - Gnome or KDE - serve to confuse new users, slow down developers and generally make the OS less attractive to users. Though you and I like the freedom.

  • How's he gonna find a honey, I mean isn't that how Bill found Melinda?
  • What would be cool is if the dialog box had a text box at the bottom which produced and updated the command line string as you checked and unchecked boxes, pulldowns, etc.
    AFAIK, AIX's SMIT does exactly this. You go through the dialog boxes and the system displays what the corresponding command line would be...and you can then go and edit the command line by hand, so you can leverage strength in both directions.
  • While I appreciate Mr. Torvald's writing the original kernel that ran one disk (kinda), the rest of the work has been done pretty much by the Community. I never used a computer until I was 40 (I'm 61 now) and so obviously am not a programmer, yet I use Linux exclusively on my desktop. From dos->win3.1->3.11->95->98->linux has been quite a trip. How any one could think that linux isn't ready for the desktop amazes me. They obviously either haven't used it, or have Microsoft's source code etched on the neurons in their brains. Sadly, Windows seems to have become some kind of benchmark in that all other OSes are compared to it. Hello there? Linux is different and can't be compared to Windows. As a working envirenment it is infinitely richer and more varied and my machine hasn't crashed since I relegated windows to the void several months ago. Running linux as opposed to running windows is analogous to a go-cart driver operating the space shuttle. It takes a little learning but more importantly, it takes a fair amount of unlearning. It's the operating system we should be teaching our kids in school. I dont much worry about the numers of users but if you're the type that gets antsy about the size of the crowd you hang with think about this: The third world isn't gonna pay Microsofts outrageous license fees if there is a superiour free OS available. Desktops in China will have KDE and Gnome desktops up, running on Red Star Linux. Windows releases have been simply bug fixes since 3.11 and the OS really has nowhere to go if it is to retain backward compatability, which is why Gates and Friends won't be unhappy to see Microsoft split. At least Billy won't. He's the new software honcho. Watch how fast the apps get ported to Linux after the split. Windows always left me with the feeling that I'd been wrestling pigs in the mud. Linux lets be feel that I'm on the edge of something new, exciting and special. The folks that devote their time to advancing our OS have my undying admiration and my heartfelt thanks. In a world of really tawdry commercial bullshit, Linux is a standout. Computers are for folks. So is Linux. We've won. Its just to good to believe, sometimes.
  • Lucky you!!
    For the price you bought your coaster, I could buy a cool coffee table!
  • And by "influence of the software industry" I'm sure he really meant "complete, monopolistic control of the software industry".

    --
  • You should use BeOS if you want low audio latency.
  • Uhh, Linus has children.

    Read the article.

  • Re:Linus has no secretary? (Score:3)

    by Ralph Wiggam ( 22354 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:40AM (#844703) Homepage
    From what I've read, Melinda was a development manager, not a secretary.
    Never mind the fact that Linus' wife could beat the snot out of him if he ever touched another woman.

    -B
  • He has no trouble admitting the shortcomings of Linux, nor any trouble touching on its strengths.
    Indeed, although he admits to spending some time "in denial" after Mindcraft <grin>
    It is certainly refreshing, and an indicator for an attitude the linux community as a whole seems to have drifted slightly away from - if linux doesn't do a task as good as $FOO, then either fix linux, or accept that $FOO is specialised to do that task and Linux is a general purpose OS. Yes, the fact that Linux wasn't really multi-processor ready for IP-heavy tasks, as the TCP/IP stack could use but a single processor. No, the correct solution isn't to flame the testers, or to stick your fingers in your ears and hope it will go away - Linux can and *will* have those abilities given enough work, so you should either do the work or support those who can.
    --
  • He. For me, Windows is often a "brainer". A real sick, twisted, and somehow retarded brainer, that is. ;^)

  • Accually audio folks that I know of want linux for a more inportant reason: it doesn't crash.

    for those who don't know, music has magical moments where everything clicks and works. The recording of the 73rd time through the same song might be as much as 1000 times better then the previous times. If you don't get the song recorded that time you missed the magic. Sure you might get it again, but not for a few hundred more times.

  • Well, that and he didn't relegate her to writing macro expansion code for Excel after she inflicted that horrible specimin of design and bloat, Microsoft Bob, on an unsuspecting populus.

  • Re:2.4 Kernel... (Score:3)

    by The Troll Catcher ( 220464 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:47AM (#844708)
    Check out this link [linuxtoday.com].
  • Actually, having linux at work wouldn't do anything for me, since I do WAY different things at work and at home. At work, I develop, I code (in fact, I will be using linux :), I pretend to administrate. At home, I play games. And MUSH and browse the web. Linux does nothing for me at home. So, different uses, different OSes.
  • I don't want this to come out all "Linux R00lz" or anything but....
    Linux in the OS dept. is like women in the workplace. They have to be better than the competition. If they are as good as the competition or even only a little bit better, that's not good enough. (which is the current situation IMO). Unfortunately, being a little bit better than Windows doesn't cut it. Linux must be spectacularly better in every way. Linux already has faster and smoother installation, nicer looking widgets, and much better "back-end" stuff. But it's not good enough, because if Linux is going to be recognized as a leader in the OS space, then it *must* be ~astoundingly~ better in every area, including in ease of use. Being just as good or even only a small amount better than the rival is not good enough.

    my US$0.02
  • No, I meant input-to-output latencies. In other words, you take audio input, mess with it, then output it again. This is what is required for realtime software synthesis and processing. (For a human to be able to discern a delay between pressing a key on a keyboard and getting the sound, you have to get > 5-7 ms or so). Neither Mac OS (at least, the old one--I don't have values for MOSX) nor Windows can compete with this. Seer Systems' wrote a software synth that pulls some kind of nasty tricks, thus enabling it to get very low latencies; I don't know how low, though.

    Check out this page [gardena.net] for details. This page is a little out of date and doesn't have the latest on Andrew Morton's new patch. But it will tell you a little about the project.

  • It's sad to see Avery Brooks sell out to Big Blue. Considering that IBM makes NT4 and Linux workstations with USB ports. One operating system never supported USB, the other guarantees never to support it correctly.
  • But in the past few weeks, Andrew Morton has written a clean and successful low-latency patch that is likely to be accepted. During testing, it has been found to be stable and get sub-2 msec latencies. We're already beating BeOS, and we've been beating Mac OS and Windows for quite some time now.

    You know, right after I hit submit, I realized I forgot to add the disclaimer of "please correct me if I'm wrong, etc, etc..." ;-) Thanks for the updated information, this is certainly exciting news. Has this stuff been tested under relatively high loads? With Linux 2.2, I can still fairly easily interrupt simple audio output when a couple processes decide to eat CPU or thrash the disk for a bit. Not that you would run critical realtime stuff on a highly loaded machine, as you point out below.

    As for cron, it's a DDT (Don't Do That!). There's no need to run cron on a DAW, so disable it.

    True, I'd certainly want to kill off (or not start to begin with) any non-essential processes on a DAW. (I wonder if MacOS X will have anything cron-like running by default that could interfere with realtime stuff) I guess my point was with preemptive multitasking, the user has to do some work to be sure nothing is running in the background that might wake up and disrupt realtime processing. Of course, maybe someone could come up with a Linux-DA distribution or something with all background services, etc turned off. But the one thing I still love about cooperative multitasking in this situation is that I don't have to worry if I forgot to kill a couple background processes. They just won't get any CPU until I'm done. It's just the peace of mind of knowing that nothing will interrupt me, without having to doublecheck. ;-)

  • Let's talk browsers.

    They all suck ass. Netscape is SUCH a memory hog. I am very disappointed the way Mozilla has bloated. I just hope that
    it will fork and someone will strip it down to a nice, standards based engine and a decent interface. Or maybe Konq will
    save the world.

    But as for IE, it is often prettier, and supports more crappy proprietary extensions, but it sure crashes a lot. I run it on Win2k
    sometimes, Win2k is a lot more stable than Win98.

    All told, I think they all suck more or less equally. But I am praying for the day something that doesn't suck comes along.

    Let me downlaod HotJava . . .

    -Peter

  • Has this stuff been tested under relatively high loads?

    Yes. Benno Senoner's latencytest finds that even with 80% CPU usage, we get no drop-outs. I just realized that Benno has put up a page at www.linuxdj.com [linuxdj.com] with an Audio-Quality FAQ. Just look under the Dropouts section.

    Of course, maybe someone could come up with a Linux-DA distribution or something with all background services, etc turned off.That would be nice. Once ALSA and the latency patch are solidified and make it into the official kernel, perhaps this will happen. There is also the news of Cubase seriously considering porting VST over. Being able to run VST plugins under Linux would be nice!

  • Yes, it's true, see for yourself: My Geek of the Week page [microsoft.com]

    I tried using Linux; all I could manage to do was get it to play Quake (I tried to network it with my other win2k computer, but it refused!)

    Windows 2000 is just plain easier to install on many computers at once. You can make an "unattended" install file to set most of the preferences. This way, you can sit through less of the install process! I haven't even seen Linux do that, and its installation procedure is so inefficient, having to uncompress thousands of files taking 7 seconds per tarball while Win2k zips along, 50ms per file on average (excluding DRIVER.CAB, which is a lifesaver sometimes!)

    As far as being mistreated (pulling the plug), if the two OSes were statues, Win2000 would be steel and Linux would be ice. Linux HATES to be shut off without unmounting filesystems. As for Windows 2000, it GIVES YOU THE OPTION to check file systems, and any missing driver files are automatically restored (I once saw someone delete NTOSKRNL from the /system32 directory. When the folder was re-opened, there it was, back again! As for Linux, god forbid if someone deletes your /etc/fstab or anything else in there!)

    Just to recap:

    Linux: Ice statue; melts under any heat; need an LCSE just to edit your /etc/fstab file.

    Windows 2000: Steel Statue; takes the heat; MUCH easier to set up.

  • As someone who supported desktops for Dell I can testify that most users are dumbasses. There is, however, a significant
    number of "non-hackers" (or whatever) who would be better off running Linux, but don't because PC magazine (which is
    horribly misnamed) keeps saying that it is "not ready for the desktop."

    So, if "desktop" is a euphemism for "dumbass" I apologize for being obtuse. If not, I can attest that in many cases installing
    and using Linux (say, Red Hat or Mandrake) is easier than installing and using Windows.

    I also have to say you picked a poor example with the VCR. I have managed to bang a "not ready" Linux distro into a quite
    useable desktop system for me and for my wife (Jo Schmoe) yet my VCR insists that it is 12:00 (blink, blink) (I may have
    found the only acceptable usage of the blink tag, but cant use it on slashdot! argh!)


  • No, they're not. When you open a file in Microsoft Office 97, you get the Office 97 file requester, even if you're running Windows 2000. When you open a file in Office 2000, you get the Office 2000 file requester, even if you're running Windows NT 4 or Windows 95.

    The situation you have described is the UI guideline that Microsoft expects you to follow, so that a well-behaved app written for Windows 3.1 could look and feel more like a Windows 95 (or 98, or NT, or 2000) app. Microsoft Office does not obey this guideline. Try it.
  • I use netscape because although ti crashes more often then IE it does not take the rest of machine with it. Once IE crashes I gotta reboot if Netscape crashes then I just kill the process and restart it.

    A Dick and a Bush .. You know somebody's gonna get screwed.

  • I think what he meant is that more businesses will realize the potential for Linux in the next year, but it will take sometime before "joe-blow" goes to thier local computer and pick up Linux and not be afraid to use it. Plus people aren't messing around with settings and customizations in the office (most aren't anyways), it is set on some generic setup and they use it as a tool. At home they try to use different fonts, install thier own software, put that picture up, post this thing on Slashdot (*grin*), etc, etc...

    In Windows, it isn't hard to botch something so that your font is 4 times as big and your stuck in 16 colors, at 640X480 and for some reason you can't get on the internet, and your viewing size on your monitor has been resized to the size of a deck of cards (hey, I work in tech support, beleive me I have seen it happen).

    Just think what happened when they introduced Windows 95? We just don't have some cheezy "Start Me Up" jingle to advertise Linux.
    Maybe we should get one? Can anybody recommend a song?

    (Just a tac-on, Don't call tech support if your 13 years old, been surfing all night and can't remove cache of your computer by yourself. It isn't my problem your mom has to use the computer in the morning.)
  • Quite right. I would say if anything, there may be more of a barrier to work desktop adoption than to home users. Home users use a computer because they want to; business users include more people who use one because they have to, and rely heavily on their IT departments to make them do anything. Additionally, all the major pieces that a home user would want are already in place, or will be soon (like when Mozilla gets a little farther along, and the next round of updates hit KDE, Gnome, and Star Office). Meanwhile, we're still missing some out-of-the-box solutions for stuff like collaberation, and the existing office sweets lack some ease-of-use features that will make them more palatable to non-techy business types and PHB's the world over. Meanwhile, motivated home users that are genuinely interested in their computers can continue to install the gradually improving releases to their hearts content.

    Still gonna be a fwe years before I get grandma building a custom kernel, however. But it may well happen well before some of the people I work with (at an 'Internet' company, or at the 'Internet' branch of a brick-and-morter) will be able to handle it.

    "Sweet creeping zombie Jesus!"

  • Man on a mission (Score:3)

    by funk_phenomenon ( 162242 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:50AM (#844724)
    Indeed, he said neither his parents nor his sister use Linux, but prefer Windows-based or Macintosh computers.

    Give me a linux distro, a roll of electrical tape, one of those Clockwork Orange type rooms, and a computer, and this can all change.

    Even the samurai
    have teddy bears,
    and even the teddy bears

  • I read the article, you comment is kinda pointless.

    More pointless than the post I was replying to? I don't think so.

    I never said Linux wasn't wealthy,

    The poster I was replying to did (and I quote):

    "Wow. Linus is fucked then. He has neither good looks, charm OR wealth."

    I said Bill Gates is the richest man on earth

    The author of the post I was replying to didn't say that. In fact, since Microsoft stock took its big tanking, I'm not even sure its absolutely true anymore. He is at least one of the most wealthy men on earth, but once you get more than a certain amount of money, does it really matter that much? Almost all of Bill Gates' fortunes are tied to Microsoft stock.

  • He certainly has someone who fields call for him. She's a press rep. Linus is a great guy, but this report sure was kissing his ass.
  • This is probably going to be marked as Flamebait or a Troll by the moderators today, [...]

    Translation: Officially, I'm saying that I expect the post to be moderated into the lower regions of Hades but in reality I know that the moderators will see this and I'm expecting to get moderated to +5 immediately. ;-)
    --

  • ...just because they leave the office? Linus must think so, according to this: "Windows is still a no-brainer for most people," he said, adding it will take Linux "perhaps five or 10 years" to catch up, at least for home-computer users. But he said average business users might move to Linux sooner, perhaps by next year.

    I don't quite understand how it can be as soon as next year, but then suddenly it will take at least 5 years. The users being discussed as *business* are the same people who go home at the end of the day. It would seem to me that it's more likely that if someone uses Linux at work that when they get home they will be familiar and proficient with it already and thus MORE likely to use it, not less. Naturally if they are more likely to use it, then they're more likely to use it *AT HOME* as well.

    When Linus says 'perhaps 5 or 10 years ... to catch up' to Windows, I read that as meaning parity in the market place. Maybe 45% Windows, 45% Linux and 6% Mac, with BeOS and others taking the rest. Parity is an amazing goal to be aiming for - the sheer number of users that 45% of the computing masses is enormous. It may well come true for the desktop - I get a feeling a lot of people are going to be using Linux without realising by this point - set-top boxes, PDA's, POS terminals and other devices running Linux under the covers.

    Business use is slightly different. For developers like me, moving to Linux gives us an easier platform to work on and administer than say Windows NT, especially when working on multiplatform code. I can also see office environments switching to Linux for, say, Lotus Notes servers and other centralized services and maybe even rolling out common working environments on desktops sitting on top of Linux, maybe even based on Evolution. Exceed is a partial solution, especially when combined with CYGWIN, but why immitate when you can have the original?

    I think Linus is way off with his numbers.. It's either going to happen in the next year, or not - take your pick.

    I think next year is too early for a revolution to a Linux dominated world on the desktop. I think we will see continued high uptake of Linux as a viable alternative and this will set the wedge for future years of expansion. With some hope over the next year we will see an increase in support for Linux from hardware manufactures, a fully stabilized release of XFree86 4 and supporting 3D acceleration drivers getting there, OpenAL starting to make an impact as an open 3D sound system on many platforms, both KDE 2 and Gnome flowering into a comfortable desktop environment and peripherals finally slotting more easily into the Linux picture. At this point the playing field will look a little more level for Linux adoption for the average user.

    Cheers,

    Toby Haynes

  • Re:New respect (Score:3)

    by smartin ( 942 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:57AM (#844739)
    Windows has it's place

    I can't agree more! The Windows 2000 CD makes an excellent coaster for my coffee mug :)
  • I am a kernel hacker, though mostly on Irix (just switching to Linux). A "race" is actually something slightly different (and is a bug 99% of the time): A race is when two processes both grab the same resource without a lock. In general, the system will die in eternal flame (or some other such bad thing) since the two processes will conflict with each other while they are both using a resource that they thing they own but really don't.

    I think the improvements he is talking about are to make finer grained locks (ie, remove as many of the "lock_kernel()"'s as possible and make other locks lock off smaller areas). Another thing you can do to improve performance (in some cases) is to replace "spinlocks" (locks where the process sits and waits for the resource to become available not allowing anything else to happen on the processor) with "mutexes" (locks where the process will yield the processor if it is waiting for a resource).

    In addition to that stuff, I think there have been general performance improvements like enhancements to the TCP/IP stack and the scheduler and such.

  • "That's where I see Linux in a few years: good front end for the end (l)users who were weaned on Windows, but with the same old shell that you can get to with ctrl-alt-f1 for when you need some real power at your fingertips."

    I see the same thing...unfortunately. Why should the "real power" be limited to those who know how to use the old UI? You are implicitly assuming (and you aren't alone--even people creating UIs are doing this) that a UI needs to somehow shield people from the Power In The Box. No no no! Don't shield, harness.

    I wish I could give examples of what I mean, but I just haven't spent the time necessary to firm up these concepts in my mind. All I know is this: The power is in there but most people can't get at it. That's not right and I blame the UI.
    --
  • I'm using kernel 2.4.0-test6 as my primary kernel on my home machine (Athlon 700, originally Mandrake 7.1). It's pretty stable for me, much better than the "inode count wrapped" errors that would fill my screen and prevent me from booting most of the time. It even has built-in support for USB (haven't tested it) and the Sound Blaster Live! card I use. Compiled in under six minutes, too. :)

    Oh, and about the flutes, they're only playing by themselves because their backup [cmu.edu] hasn't arrived yet. :)
  • Read the article. Linus is a millionaire. While perhaps not 'silly rich' like Bill Gates, he isn't exactly not wealthy.

  • Re:2.4 Kernel... (Score:5)

    by po_boy ( 69692 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @09:30AM (#844749)
    Can anyone comment on the improvements that he speaks of?

    There are a couple of tidbits from kernel traffic [linuxcare.com] which may be helpful. One is a discussion [linuxcare.com] on Joe Pranevich's DRAFT of his The Wonderful World Of Linux 2.4 [kernelnotes.org]. The other is the DISCUSSION of the DRAFT of a PROPOSED press release [linuxcare.com] which highlights the big features for when 2.4 comes out.

    If you're into finding out things before they are final and are an early adopter, these may be of use to you. They are certainly not finished documents and should not be treated as such. They may contain misleading statements, misunderstandable statements, misunderstood points, mention of features that don't make it, and/or outright lies with the intention of deceit.

  • Regarding the floating-point stuff, presumably the problem is things like divide-by-zero exception ... well, can't you mask that?
  • Piker. 17 years. Back in the days of 4.1BSD on a Vax 11/780. And Unix V7 on a PDP-11/70.

    Okay, man, ya got me.

    I did actually own a PDT-11 once, about ten years ago, shortly after I moved out on my own.

    It had several serial ports on the back for connecting to terminals (and came with a DEC VT-100, which I still have) and teletypes (I did get rid of the DEC LA-36, it was too fscking big).

    Two eight inch diskette drives. And when you flipped up the lid, there was a processor (I think it was an 8080) and 16 k of RAM. Circa about 1976.

    I *think* it was a very small client/server computer setup, but I don't know for sure; I never was able to get it to fire up, and no one seems to know what the PDT (not PDP) was.

    Thoughts?

  • ROFL!
    We should start making a list of fake user agents, and visit some of the more obvious doubleclick sites with them. I wonder how much effort it would be to make the user-agent a configurable parameter in Mozilla? for that matter, I wonder if I could feed doubleclick some or all of the following:

    user-agent Moz/4.0 (Compatable; IE 7.0 MS-internal only; Linux 2.2.13/FreeX86)
    username B.Gates@microsoft.com
    referrer: http://internal.planning.microsoft.com/business_pl anning/corporate_targets_list.htm

    <grin>
    --

  • If you want a simple-to-understand Linux, one route to go is to get Slackware and install only the "A" and "N" series, installing the minimum number of packages to get up and going on the 'net.

    Thanks, that's *exactly* what I want. The most minimal Linux system that can be called Linux, to which I can add things as I understand what those things are. Typically the install (no matter how little you check) dumps mounds of strange binaries around and you can't really tell if it is necessary or not. On a laptop with a 700 MB hard drive it gets annoying having 50-100 MB worth of unknown binaries.
  • Well, I have a Red Hat 4.2 Unleashed and it is basically a compilation of random information about installing and administration and then stuff like Tk/Tcl, Perl, etc.

    Doesn't seem to really be a comprehensive guide to the system, just explains the points they think are "important" (obviously that include Motif and Tcl programming).

    But I'll try to find a decent reference to get my head straight.

  • Re:Xwindows wars (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Put this in your Junkbuster config file:

    user-agent Mozilla/4.72 [En] (X11; U; Linux Millenium; Pentium 4; Nav)

    This will leave some naive web site administrators scratching their heads for a while...

  • Just remember one thing: How long did it take MS to create an end-user based
    operating system? Windows 3.1 was the first time Microsoft made an end user
    interface anyone could use, and it still lacked many fundamental design
    intricasies that were necessary. 95 was their first real success; before 3.1,
    the personal computer wasn't the "toy" for the masses it is now. Linus'
    figures are extremely accurate [in my eye] concerning the end-user market
    usability.
    The current situation with X reminds me of the early days of Windows 2.0,
    where Microsoft's advertisements blatantly say "It'll help you get ready
    for OS/2!"
  • if linux doesn't do a task as good as $FOO...

    Hmmm. I see now that Microsoft has adopted a new marketing ploy of using hexadecimal to represent prices, thereby conserving digits and thereby giving the false appearance of a lower price. I must say, though, $3,840 is a lot to pay per seat in desktop liscensing fees. Those wiley Microsoft bastards!

    And yes, I too have perl rot on the brain.
  • Personally, benchmarks have never been my reason for switching to Linux. I could care less if Windows is faster or better. I use Linux because it is FREE (as in speech AND beer.) I Linux NEVER catches up or surpases Windows (which it WILL) I would still use Linux.

  • Re:New respect (Score:5)

    by pete-classic ( 75983 ) <hutnick@gmail.com> on Friday August 18, 2000 @09:04AM (#844772) Homepage Journal
    It is fundamentally untrue that "Linux is not ready for the desktop."

    I use Linux as my primary desktop OS.

    I am not a programmer.

    I understand that it is not appropriate for most (l)users, but that does not make it "not ready."

    My grandmother does not drive a Porsche, it would be too much for her, and wouldn't carry groceries well, but that doesn't make it "not ready for the highway."

    In the same way, Linux does not make a good platform for Word and AOL, but that does not make it not ready.

    This whole "not ready for the desktop" idea revolves around the assumption that there is some ideal desktop for everyone, and that Windows (or MacOS) is closer to this that "Linux" (really, KDE or GNOME or Windowmaker, or something) and that "Linux" has further to go towards this ideal.

    I disagree. For me, customizability is king, and "Linux" takes the prize in this field. (note: BeOS might, but HW support is too weak -for me-)

    Windows is not ready for MY desktop.

    -Peter

  • Re:Non-server use of Linux (Score:5)

    by ceswiedler ( 165311 ) <chris@swiedler.org> on Friday August 18, 2000 @09:06AM (#844776)
    I think that last statement is untrue. About a month ago, many of the audio engineers you spoke of released an "open letter" to the linux-kernel mailing list. They requested that the average and max latencies be reduced (for exactly the same reasons you mention). They suggested a set of patches created by Ingo Molnar, but not integrated into the main tree. This started a flame war on linux-kernel over the validity of the patches, but the views of Linus were well-stated: he believed that reducing latency was a "serious issue" and considered it very important.

    As happens with many such requests/patches, the implementation details were shouted over at length, but most of the kernel hackers seemed to be in agreement that reducing latency was a big concern.

    Kernel traffic (what a great resource!) has the thread here. [linuxcare.com]
  • I was one of the signatories of the petition. My statement about Linus not being interested was meant to relate more to his interest in music applications themselves. It's not really his thing (which is not bad, or anything). I also seem to recall that he once made some statement which equated to, "I don't think Linux should be on the desktop." I may have this wrong, however.

    At any rate, he does appear to have some hope of this happening at some point.

  • Microsoft doesn't even follow its own UI standards, though. In every version of Office, for example, the file open/save dialog box works like the one in the next version of Windows. I do NOT need nonstandard rollout menus, menus that "pull down" from the left side of the screen (vertical menu bars are IMPOSSIBLE to read), and so forth and so on. Just click on the system menu (the top-left "e" page icon) in Internet Explorer. Notice how the system menu in IE doesn't pull down; it pops out like you right-clicked an icon. It's facts like these that make me suspect that Microsoft's UI guidelines don't apply to its own internal products.

    I get enough calls from people complaining that they accidentally moved their taskbar to the left side of the screen because they clicked and dragged just a teensy bit next to the Start button. That's a largely undocumented feature, one that's discovered by accident. Other features, like the "Quick Launch" toolbar (which looks surprisingly similar to the tray, and can even be accidentally moved next to the tray) confuse users into needing to learn too much about the OS. Sometimes I wish that computers still shipped with a launcher like AtEase for the Mac, that completely hides the underpinnings of the system to all users except the administrator. Want to open an app? Click on it. End of story.
  • I know this will come across as paranoid delusion, but bare with me:

    Maybe Linus' stance on "Linux not being ready for the desktop for another 5 to 10 years" is part of a greater plan? Maybe the intention behind that statement is to divert attention from what Transmeta is currently working on - an embedded Linux for set-top consumer devices.

    In 5 to 10 years, Linux may be a ripe alternative to Windows; but if Transmeta has it's way, there won't even BE a 'desktop' by then. The computer will be in your wall, your TV, your microwave, your car dashboard... All of them happily running Linux, networking and making life easier - While on the "desktop", everyone will still curse the Blue Screen of Death, none the wiser that Linux keeps humming and running the world, not even earnestly aiming for the 'desktop' niche.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • I'm not a Mac advocate - I hate the fscking things - but my iMac gives me 32 SAMPLE latency at 44kHz - that's well under ONE msec. Sub 4 msec is good on a PC; one msec is what proaudio requires; and saying that Linux is already beating the MacOS is just FUD.
  • Not only did it suck, but it is sort of filled with ingratiating whitewash.

    Thank you. It DID suck.

    And I love the fact that some pimply-faced-never-kissed-a-girl-dork moderated it down to ZERO calling it "off topic". I directly addressed the WSJ article. How can THAT be off topic?

    I must confess... Some of the moderating and meta-moderating over the last year is really going to turn me off and cause me to never return to this board again. And I know others feel that way, too.

    I know, you don't care, and you don't have to.

    Rich...

  • It is unreasonable to expect a person to remember that "grep -quiet" and "grep -silent" are two different things.
    I don't know what system you're using, but in GNU [gnu.org] grep(1) on my Debian [debian.org] 2.2 box they're the same. --quiet and --silent are the same as -q (suppress normal output). They are not , howeber, the same as -s, (aka --no-messages), which suppresses file-related error messages.

    In other words, yes, there's a potential for confusion there, but it's not the one you say it is.

  • Isn't this all academic anyway?

    There's that cool real-time processing stuff (RT Linux, ISTR) which runs Linux as a non-real-time subtask, thus giving guaranteed latencies even if you are running cron, et al. All you need on top of that is decent drivers.

    I can't imagine any decent sound support on any multi-user, multi-application, paged OS. But with this real-time stuff it can all happen in the background with guaranteed QOS. And that is getting towards proaudio.

  • This is not the issue: I only want diversity! (Score:3)

    by jw3 ( 99683 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @09:19AM (#844807) Homepage
    This is may be offtopic here, but since your post got moderated so high, I feel the urge to some constructive criticism.

    Since I have started arguing on a polish newsgroup devoted to computer advocacy three or so years ago (seems like an eternity...), my point was always: I don't want any world domination. I don't even want to be in majority. I just want to be able to keep those tools and this OS I like, which works *for me*. I keep hearing about the average user. The average use of the word "average" is a misuse of statistics: as anyone can tell you, it doesn't tell you the variance, or even whether the distribution is normal. I don't want to be put in the category of an average user. Although not a techie, but a mere biologist, I use computer as a tool much of the time at work. I want to have my niche. Linux gives it to me. For me, Linux was perfect as a desktop OS two years ago! It had all I needed (with one notable exception: the possibility to communicate with Microsoft Office users. This hasn't changed and looking at various efforts this will be the last thing that will, taking into regard the fact that various Office versions have very hard times trying to import each others documents).

    In my opinion -- though I have read only the public version of the interview -- Linux is wrong if he sees those things so one-sided. Windows were a boom, and taking lessons from evolutionary biology what one could expect would be adaptative radiation. Computer for a scientist, home office computer, game computer... et cetaera. I definitely have very seriously different needs from the fellow game-addicted Ph.D. student sitting next to me. And they are more deep then just different software installed over the same, bloated, idiot-proof, easy-to-learn, hard-to-make-work, ugly OS. Divergence in place of competition: if we had Linux boxes instead of that Mac / Win98 / WinNT melee at the lab would save us many problems. Linux is good for someone used to read the documentation, willing to learn technical information or to invest some time in learning (that is, taking a steep learning curve) or to just finding the things out. Coincidentally, people who choose natural science are often like this. I want Linux as a scientific OS, not a user-friendly bloatware.

    Joe Schmoe may bite his toe. I don't care. Or, rather, I do. I don't want him to get hands on my OS. May he stay with Windows as long I can use Linux. Forcing Linux to be the desktop OS for Joe Schmoe is harmful for both. I hate saying it, but I really don't give a damn about KDE / Gnome. One week of learnig bash saves you 1 GB of hard disk (via rpm -e kde). (Well.. I am exagerating... a little bit...). It is Joe Schmoes fault.

    Best regards,

    January

    P.S. You didn't say pro-Microsoft things. You said pro-Windows things. That is worse. Microsoft is a large company. There are many IT companies. There is no need for Linux becoming Windows. We already have Windows. They *will* become better with a little competition. Linux should become better Linux.

    P.S.2. I may sound as a 50 yrs old Unix hacker by saying "giving up man pages, command line options, and stdin/stdout capability is a sin and people who do this should burn in hell", but in fact I am 27, working on experimental biology, and free climbing in my free time.

  • Re:New respect (Score:3)

    by ucblockhead ( 63650 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @09:53AM (#844808) Homepage Journal
    I have two boxes. Both are K6-II's with 128 Mb RAM. One runs Win98. One runs Mandrake 7.1. With this, I feel I've got a good base to compare the two.

    Both have their advantages.

    Both have their disadvantages.

    The advantages of Windows are exactly in some of those areas that "home" users are most interested in. It has a better web browser. Sorry, but it just does. Browsing on Netscape is a pain. It just plain sucks. Windows is also better for games. Windows also plays video media better. Windows also runs certain applications like Quicken that don't yet have equivalents under Linux. And, in general, the desktop is quicker than any Linux desktop I've tried.

    Those are the sorts of things home users care about.

    Yes, Linux takes the prize for customability. It is also a far better dev box. It is also more stable. More flexible. Less frustrating. It has more of the sort of software I'm interested in.

    That's good for me. That's why I've got it.

    But frankly, home users don't care about those things as much as they do about browsing the net and playing games.

    When people say that Linux is "not ready for the desktop", they are talking about for the average user. They are not saying that it isn't ready for everyone. They aren't saying that it won't work for anyone. They are talking about the average user. That are saying that the average user, who doesn't give a good goddamn who makes the software, but just wants something that does what they want to do, who tends to do things like write letters to grandma, sell things on e-bay, and play Myst, find Windows an OS that better meets their needs.

    And they are right about that. If you want to overtake Windows as a desktop OS, you need to admit that, then start working on changing that.
    • He said the new version of Linux will run better on high-end computers, such as those containing more than one processor. Mr. Torvalds said tests show the new Linux compares "really well" with its rivals, including Windows and other versions of Unix. "It is painful for me to go back and use the 2.2 kernel," he said, referring to the current version.
    Can anyone comment on the improvements that he speaks of? They must be significant, since it is "painful" for him to use 2.2. I'm especially interested because my workstation is a dual processor box.

  • He almost let his ego get to him (Score:3)

    by jjr ( 6873 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:25AM (#844814) Homepage
    I am glad he did not let his ego get to him
    they consider ANY feedback good this a sign of
    a smart man

    quote:
    Subsequent tests, though, showed Microsoft was
    right, and in his interview, Mr. Torvalds
    conceded that he initially had been "in denial"
    on the matter.

    "We had been arrogant," he said, adding it was
    painful for him to admit that Windows was better
    than Linux, at least in the areas covered by the
    Microsoft test.


  • He said he is also availing himself of some of the advantages of good fortune, such as buying a house for himself, his wife and two young daughters, as well as trading in his old Pontiac for a sporty BMW Z3. His fortunes may swell in coming months as Thursday, his employer, Transmeta Corp., filed to go public.

    Plus, he's guaranteed a great retirement w/ speaking engagements, if he so desires. It seems to me only the wall street jopuranl would make a point of that fact he is getting rich through stocks....

  • Inaccessable? (Score:3)

    by / ( 33804 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:25AM (#844816)
    The normally inaccessible Mr. Torvalds spoke in an interview....

    Am I the only one who considers Linus one of the most accessible leaders in the tech industry? The man is like the Finish brother in law I never had.

  • Re:Multimedia development in Linux (Score:5)

    by Art Tatum ( 6890 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @10:06AM (#844827)
    But realtime multimedia development demands realtime response, which is difficult if not nearly impossible to achieve, guaranteed, in a pre-emptively multitasking OS. I've never used BeOS but had heard good things about it in this regard, and SGI has some nice guaranteed-rate I/O stuff and realtime process priorities in IRIX. But Linux at this point isn't that close.

    Have you been following the news on linux-audio-dev? For the past year or so, there has been a kernel patch (by Ingo Molnar) that guarantees latency times below 4 msec. This is on par with BeOS, previously the market leader. (Windows, for reference, gets about 20 msec; I'm not sure about the old Mac OS, but I know it's not that great.) Unfortunately, this patch was kind of kludgy (by Ingo's own admission) and Linus wouldn't include it. But in the past few weeks, Andrew Morton has written a clean and successful low-latency patch that is likely to be accepted. During testing, it has been found to be stable and get sub-2 msec latencies. We're already beating BeOS, and we've been beating Mac OS and Windows for quite some time now.

    As for cron, it's a DDT (Don't Do That!). There's no need to run cron on a DAW, so disable it.

    On the topic of MOSX, I think it should do quite well. It's heavily based on NeXTSTEP, which was quite popular in serious computer music fields (CCRMA and so forth). The MusicKit is also being actively updated for MOSX (and somewhat less actively ported to Linux/GNUstep). I have to say that I'm increasingly excited about the developments in computer music lately--it's an exciting time to be doing this.

  • Non-server use of Linux (Score:4)

    by Art Tatum ( 6890 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:26AM (#844833)
    "Windows is still a no-brainer for most people," he said, adding it will take Linux "perhaps five or 10 years" to catch up, at least for home-computer users.

    Well, from recent discussion on the linux-audio-dev list, I can safely state that many audio engineers and musicians are dying to start using Linux. They're sick and tired of the high latencies (even with DirectSound) under Windows; they're tired of the crashes. Between ALSA, Andrew Morton's new low-latency patch, the developing LADSPA, and more, Linux is a rising music platform. Unfortunately, Linus doesn't seem to be too interested in (or particularly cognizant of) these developments. But still, it's coming; and it's coming rapidly.

  • At last, a well balanced Linux advocate. . . (Score:5)

    by Spasemunki ( 63473 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:26AM (#844834) Homepage
    A good interview. I'm consistantly impressed with the candor and openness that Linus exhibits when he talks about a project that is, in a big way, his baby. He has no trouble admitting the shortcomings of Linux, nor any trouble touching on its strengths. His comments prove that it is possible to be a very strong advocate without resorting to extremism or flame warring. How many people who aren't nearly as involved as Linus can wade into the OS debate while maintaining some perspective? Linus Torvalds will convince more people of the virtues of Linux with his balanced take on the issue than any given hundred /. "M$ is the evil empire, windoze sucks, Linux roolz" posters.

    "Sweet creeping zombie Jesus!"

  • Mr. Torvalds coordinates Linux in a somewhat detached manner. He concerns himself only with intricate, technical details of Linux, and won't take a stand on such issues as what sort of user interface the software should have.

    That is one reason there are now two rival Linux interfaces. Mr. Torvalds also has no support staff; in fact, he doesn't even have a secretary.

    Mr. Torvalds defended his habits. He said, for example, that not selecting an "official" Linux user interface allows the best one to emerge through competition.

    I don't think I've seen someone throw Linuses secretary preferences in the middle of a Gnome/KDE discussion before.

  • New respect (Score:4)

    by Wind_Walker ( 83965 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:27AM (#844836) Homepage Journal
    This is probably going to be marked as Flamebait or a Troll by the moderators today, but it's only because I'm expressing an unpopular opinion: Windows has its place, and right now, its place is leading the software industry.

    I was skeptical when following the link to the interview; I figured it was going to be full of pro-Linux statements, advocating the crushing of Windows. But, from the mouth of Linus himself, "Windows is still a no-brainer for most people." And well it should be. Microsoft got to the position they're in today by being the best of what was out there (emphasis on was) and by catering to the end user. Yes, Windows 95 is buggy, crashes a lot, has the security of a single sleeping puppy trying to guard a mansion, but it's by far the easiest O/S to manage for the home user. Again, according to Linus, both his mother and sister still use Windows or Macintosh.

    That's exactly it. Linux is absolutely not ready for the desktop. I have problems running it now at work, administering only 9 boxes. NFS filesystems drop, X freezes up with no recovery, and don't get me started on Netscape. Microsoft has the end-user market nailed right now. And Linus acknowledges it.

    I got a new found respect for Linus today. It appears that he has not been blinded by the bright lights of the press and their attention. 5 or 10 years, he says, until Linux is ready for the home user. I would place that a little lower right now, from the latest releases of RedHat (the install process is slick compared to old Slackware installs). RedHat is moving Linux to the masses, and they should be commended. For Linux to be true competition, we have to have both sides of the fence; server AND workstation. Server is doing pretty damn well right now. Time to focus on Joe Schmoe, the average user.

    Ok, moderators, since I said pro-RedHat and, even worse, pro-MS things, I expect to lose heaps of karma. Do your worst.
    ------

  • Xwindows wars (Score:3)

    by DaveHowe ( 51510 ) on Friday August 18, 2000 @08:29AM (#844837)
    Two quotes sorta spring out at me:

    "Mr. Torvalds said tests show the new Linux compares "really well" with its rivals, including Windows and other versions of Unix. "It is painful for me to go back and use the 2.2 kernel," he said, referring to the current version.

    "Mr. Torvalds [co-ordinates linux development], and won't take a stand on such issues as what sort of user interface the software should have.
    That is one reason there are now two rival Linux interfaces."
    They REALLY don't get it, do they?

    I assume the editor had picked up from a piece on Sun's adoption of Gnome (and not KDE) that there were only two possible ways to use Linux. I am forced to assume the concept of a windows manager being interchangable is beyond him. As for the first quote, well, I suspect he is convince that there will be a shiny new "Linux Millenium" on the shelves for xmas, which would fit into his nice tidy microsoft-style image of "the linux product". The idea that the new kernel is already in use across the planet would astonish him.....
    --

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close