Alan Cox Interview 210
cuvavu sent in a lengthy interview with Alan Cox. He talks about his responsibilities at Red Hat, Microsoft, the Linux Standard Base, etc.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Alan Cox Interview
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
What is research but a blind date with knowledge? -- Will Harvey
definatly an interesting read. (Score:1)
Re:definatly an interesting read. (Score:1)
Your comment posted 02-15-02 10:54
Wow you read fast.
I met Alan at RedHat (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I met Alan at RedHat (Score:4, Informative)
The desktop has been pentrated but it's still going to be tough to exploit the foothold and it was tough getting this far, so I don't think there is a contradiction.
"Penetrated" is not "conquered". Hmm...what would Freud say?
TWW
Re:I met Alan at RedHat (Score:1)
probably because (Score:4, Insightful)
When it first started getting good recognition for being usable on the desktop, he probably thought it would take off. Unfortuneately, that hasn't happened yet for a number of reasons. That is mainly the result, I think, of the chicken and egg problem.
With increasing usage in servers by large business, and also for cool stuff like doing graphics rendering for big movie studios, hopefully it will steadily gain recognition and people will start using it.
I think first it needs more support from manufacturers. At least one of the big ones needs to push Linux in a big way and include a ton of apps, and it would probably help for it to be on a really slick iMAC-like PC.
Re:probably because (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:probably because (Score:1)
Re:probably because (Score:5, Interesting)
Most software I want under linux doesn't come on cds anyway... it's freely available on the net, and generally I just run apt-get to grab the program I want... which is pretty easy. There are even some GUIs for it. The end user can kind of look at it like they look at Napster or Morpheus... a list of all the files and programs they can install if they click the button, except in this case it is all legitimate.
Ease of installation isn't really what's holding Linux back... Linux won't really do much on the desktop until it's preinstalled by OEMs and the user just buys their computer. The majority of desktop users out there aren't going to install any new kind of OS on their system, much less an upgrade to Windows. They get the latest version when they get a new computer. Until Linux is an option in that arena (and given MS's tactics with OEMs, it will be slow going), it won't make too many grand strides. But again, the reason isn't that it's too hard to install a program, it's just that people don't get it by default.
Most people keep the defaults.
Re:probably because (Score:1)
So when they say "My PC has Win95", it has not occurred to them that it could run Win98, or ME, XP, or even Linux. It came with 95, so it has 95. End of story.
Pre-installation of Linux on end-user desktop PCs sold in major retail outlets would have a huge impact on the total number of Linux users... but that is probably a long way off..
Of course, there's nothing (AFAIK) stopping a vendor selling a PC which they'd paid the MS Tax on, but which to they'd added/replaced Linux. It'd cost them the MS Tax plus the development work in tuning it to their end-users' needs, which in the cut-throat world of PC sales is prohibitive.
Of course, I could be wrong!
Re:probably because (Score:2)
I'm not saying you should have bought VA or Tuxtops, but next time you think about getting a computer, look around. If you're putting together your own hardware and you can do it cheaper, good for you -- but I hope to see Linux pre-installed grow out of small companies run by people in the community, not co-opted by large corporations looking for a free ride.
Oh, and visit my site (linux-pc.net) -- Its not up, but I could use a DoS on my DSL.
Re:probably because (Score:1)
but I hope to see Linux pre-installed grow out of small companies run by people in the community, not co-opted by large corporations looking for a free ride.
The downside to that is that small companies can't necessarily compete with the "big boys". I would rather see Linux available from the huge companies than to be forced into purchasing a license for an operating system that I am never going to use.
In fact, I don't want anything preinstalled because I would just wipe it and install from scratch. However not everyone is as anal as I am and would probably like a pre-installed Linux machine from a reliable big company that can offer a good deal. The companies are not cashing in on free linux software, the customer is saving from the high software charge.
How to REALLY penetrate the Desktop (Score:3, Interesting)
2) Clean up the file system. There should be:
3) Make a list of all the applets included with Windows and Apple. Make perfect copies. Kill off all the rest of the crap - choice is complexity and complexity is bad.
4) Make it insanely easy to install. One click. Make applications standard to install (like install shield except without suckage).
5) Do the little things: Auto detect mountable drives like floppies and CDs. Printers. Digital Cameras. Make a list of things that DON'T have a driver and put in the back of the box.
6) Include OpenOffice, Mozilla and Evolution.
7) Put it all on one CD. Get Coca-cola to distribute the CDs free with every 2 liter.
8) See what Apple is doing with OSX? Do that. (And remember that Apple is a desktop enemy especially since they're using *nix. Every desktop that uses OSX isn't using Linux...
If I had a clue, I'd make a new distrib called "SuperSimpleLinux" and take over the desktop.
-Russ
the text. (Score:4, Informative)
itwales.com: You're a leading kernel developer on Linux. What exactly does your role entail?
Alan: Mostly I am involved in making sure changes get integrated and that the changes are of a high enough quality. Often this also means working through longer-term plans for the Linux kernel. It also gets to be fun because many of the contributors have conflicting aims and it is necessary to find problem solutions that work for all cases - from Linux on a PDA to Linux mainframes.
itwales.com: The Linux kernel is a modular one. What benefits does this bring to the OS user?
Alan: Modularity is an essential part of a reliable system. If you cannot change one part of the system without needing to modify the rest of the system you cannot fix a bug without risking introducing thousands more.
The modularity is more important to developers. With developers working on Linux on all continents its essential that everyone can make changes without full communication.
itwales.com: You recently stated that you plan to work more closely with customers
How do you see your role changing in the near future?
Alan: Red Hat is starting to pick up a number of enterprise customers. These people pay for - and expect - a very high standard of service. That includes improving the OS kernel to provide facilities that they depend on in legacy platforms they want to discard. One of the things Red Hat has to be able to do is to deliver those facilities.
itwales.com: The Linux OS is renowned for being stable, fast and virtually virus-immune. How have you achieved this?
Alan: Open development. People have spent ten years looking over each other's code able to refine the existing code and to spot security holes. The same process of peer review that ensures university research quality and that bridges don't fall down has simply been applied to software, which as an engineering discipline should always have been the case.
itwales.com: As a student, you installed Linux on the Swansea Computer Society computer. Is this how you began experimenting with the Linux kernel and became interested in Linux?
Alan: At the time the 386 based PC began to take off it was apparent that this was the better longer-term option for the society. We had two old minicomputers kindly donated by the computer center but we needed to move on. It also appealed to quite a few of the society people because it was not a closed box. The computer society's goal was educational and a bunch of students attempting to debug their own kernel certainly proved that.
itwales.com: 'Open source' means software is owned by everyone, and anyone can contribute to it. Is the sharing of ideas important to you? Was choosing to work within the free software community an ethical decision?
Alan: Technically the software is still owned by the person who wrote it, but that is more of a credit thing - which is important in the community. For me it wasn't really an ethical decision, it's simply the right way to do engineering. You don't build reliable bridges by refusing to let anyone see the plans.
There is a real problem in both the US and Western Europe today with people trying to own and control ideas, but that is something bigger than just software or free software. Ironically it is having the same effects on free software as other things - all the great innovation is moving to Eastern Europe, India and South America.
itwales.com: What are the advantages of an open community when it comes to product development?
Alan: From the developer point of view it means there is a huge range of talent. No matter how obscure a problem or a requirement is there will be someone who wants to solve it and who understands the field.
It also allows the sharing of development work. A large part of a computer system nowadays is generic and the revenue is in customisation and services. In the open community the cost of building the generic parts of a system are shared not duplicated. For researchers it has turned out to be a very big blessing too. It is possible to take an open source OS and modify it to test research theories and algorithms in real world environments without building costly throwaway mock ups. Furthermore, if it works out, it can be folded into the main project.
itwales.com: Linux has yet to be widely adopted as an OS by businesses, but the expense of Windows new XP operating system might change that. How are you targeting businesses?
Alan: Larger companies are adopting Linux rapidly for server systems in particular. Getting further into that market is now mostly about growing the quality of high-end support services.
The desktop is more challenging because desktop users are an extremely varied bunch of people. It demands a high quality and an easy-to-use environment - which is now mostly there - and it demands a large application portfolio which tends to be the chicken and egg problem.
At the moment the desktop market for Linux is growing in two areas. Firstly in providing large numbers of easily managed desktops running either custom or very standardised software (such as the Star Office suite), secondly in the technical desktop market where the tools wanted are primarily the powerful development tools Linux has had for many years.
The ever-rising price of MS office is increasingly pushing companies to look at Star Office both on Windows and on Linux. In many ways the effective forty per cent price hikes in Microsoft pricing have been the biggest driver of Linux on the desktop.
itwales.com: Are the merits of Linux's business applications attracting users?
Alan: The main things that attract business at that level are the pricing, reliability and the reduced business risk. The fact that there are multiple suppliers of the operating system gives a great deal of comfort to companies using it. In addition the license ensures that they can always get a custom change made for their own use, even if the main distributors are not interested. In the open source world one example of this was Y2K. When packages had Y2K problems and were no longer maintained by their authors, anyone or any group of users could fix or pay for fixing work. There was no "enforced upgrade" risk.
itwales.com: It's been said that in the last year, particularly with IBM's use of Linux technology, Linux has become a mass-market alternative to Windows. Was 2001 a turning point for Linux?
Alan: It didn't strike me as a turning point. There has been a continuous trend in the increasing use of Linux particularly server side. With some of the big names now using and supporting it, visibility has increased.
itwales.com: Do you think Linux markets itself effectively to businesses?
Alan: That is really a job for the vendors, and I think they are doing a good job. There is a difference between effective marketing and claiming to be the one true solution to all problems. Linux is not the one true solution (if such a thing truthfully ever can exist), but we are working on it.
itwales.com: Why should an SME choose Linux as an operating system?
Alan: Because it will save them money and do the job better. If at this time that isn't true for their application set then they shouldn't choose it. The desktop monopoly has perhaps clouded things but with any tool the same fundamental rules apply, be it a hammer or a web server. Is it the right price, is it reliable, will it do the job?
itwales.com: How does it save SME's money, specifically?
Alan: As an SME you can pick from multiple vendors, or download it yourself. You can install it on as many machines as you like without expensive software auditing. If you need specialist features you can go to a company with experience directly in the matter. You can buy support from where you feel happiest, including companies that actually listen to their customers. No single company controls the ability to modify the software.
In many ways the lack of a per seat license to install the software is a side effect of the recognition that it's more efficient to develop openly. The better overall pricing, improved reliability and removal of vendor lock-ins are the really important factors.
itwales.com: How can Linux overcome Microsoft's dominance at the desktop? Will you have to come up with radical new technology?
Alan: In part this depends on the legal settlements. One of the big problems right now is getting Linux pre-installed on a PC. When you investigate why this is hard you end up looking back at questionable monopolist influences.
With the settlement, the large number of civil lawsuits pending, possible EU action, and the question now raised in the US about whether business practices of not paying dividends are in fact allowable or an illicit tax haven there are several chances for justice to be done.
Beyond that, the open source model is faster and more cost effective. It improves more rapidly, and for less investment. It's very hard to compete against a fundamentally more efficient model.
itwales.com: Microsoft recently implied that it's going to seriously target Linux in 2002 as a competitor, plus any vendors that support it (such as IBM). They are especially concerned with the server marketplace, and aim to find out about the use of Linux in their customer base. How can Linux combat this 'assault' from the IT giant?
Alan: Primarily by being cheaper, more reliable and higher quality. End users believe their own experiences over a salesman. Company directors talk to each other as well as to sales people. In terms of advertising, IBM have already been running Linux TV advertising in the USA.
itwales.com: In recent years, commentators have warned of a fragmentation of Linux (in a similar fashion to Unix). Because the OS is open source, programmers can come up with different versions, and applications may not run on every version of the OS. Do you think a level of competition will be introduced by this?
Alan: Competition and product differentiation don't have to mean incompatibility, and in fact the incompatibility story is mostly a marketing myth put about by a certain large vendor. The Linux companies care about compatibility a great deal, and one recent result of this was the Linux Standard Base, which defines precisely the base behavior of the core Linux software that applications rely on. You can expect to see compliance statements in the next series of vendor releases.
itwales.com: You resigned from the Usenix ALS committee earlier this year, reportedly because Dmitry Sklyarov, the Russian programmer, was arrested in the US. What do you think of the situation in the US at the moment with regard to the Digital Millennium Copyright act?
Alan: At the moment I consider the USA not a safe place for a software engineer to visit. Money and lobbyists buy many things but when it comes to the courts I don't think that the DMCA aim to send people to jail for even discussing security flaws is going to stand well against the US constitution. Until then I'd rather play safe.
These things happen. Right now the UK government is busy trying to pass the similar European copyright directive into law in a way which may well make it a criminal offence to help a blind person read an electronic book if it has been protected by some mechanism that interferes with their screen reading software. It also puts web caches that do filtering (for example pornography filtering for schools) on questionable legal ground.
itwales.com: What is your opinion on the government's involvement with Microsoft? Do you think that governments, as a rule, should use open source technology?
Alan: When the prime minister is appearing at product launches by a company twice found by courts to be abusing a monopoly, and facing billions of dollars in lawsuits you have to ask questions
Governments should evaluate open source technologies certainly. The fact they get the source code and can audit it has been a reason for some countries to adopt open source, pricing is another. However, I don't think its right that government should have fixed rules beyond "fair review". There may be situations where proprietary software is genuinely the right choice.
itwales.com: In terms of its skills base and its WDA initiatives, do you think Wales is improving as a venue for software development?
Alan: In some ways - and the lack of London pricing means it is cheaper for an SME to get the staff (as well as a higher standard of living for the staff) than in the South East. Right now we seem to have a problem in that all the IT literate people move to the South East because there is little Welsh IT employment. As a result of them moving there is no expertise here so there are not enough Welsh IT companies. Thus the cycle continues.
It is a very hard problem, and one I am glad I don't have to solve!
Re: the text. (Score:3, Funny)
> Alan Cox is one of the most influential IT innovators in the world. A graduate of the University of Wales, Swansea, he has been a key developer of the Linux kernel for nearly a decade.
Yes, and if only we could get him to quit writing code like
Re: the text. (Score:2, Funny)
Re: the text. (Score:1)
> ++cyfanswm_yr_ymwelwÿr;
Yeah -- that's the kind of code he should write!
ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage ignore this lameness filter borkage
IBM Linux TV advertising (Score:2, Interesting)
IBM Linux TV advertising - The apology (Score:2)
That said, I would like to explain my intentions. While commenting the words of Alan Cox "IBM have already been running Linux TV advertising in the USA.", I asked "Is there any place I can download that ad from?". However vulgar and offensive that may have sounded, my intentions were not evil. I am interested in promotion of my favorite kernel, i.e. the Linux(tm), I also liked the Peace, Love & Linux [ibm.com] campaign of the International Business Machines, ergo I thought that I would like to see this TV advertising, which Alan Cox was talking about. But there is one problem, however. I do not live in the United States, where that advertising took place, therefore I could not have seen it. That is why I ask you, where could I download the pirated version of this advertising from?
Once again, I am sorry if this post has also hurt anyone's feelings, like the previous one. It was not my intention at all, please believe me.
Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:5, Funny)
I expect the lights have gone out all over Wales. Fat housewives will be running to shout "more coal! more coal!" down mine-shafts. In their Assembly they'll be told "Now then boys, I've got something very serious to tell you, so all pay attention now. Wales has been Slashdotted..."
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:4, Interesting)
A little explanation for the benefit of our American friends. The Welsh call their parliament the Assembly. An assembly is also the morning meeting at schools where the head teacher makes announcements and often reads a moral or religious story.
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:1, Funny)
Yes we do, its on NBC every week. That show cracks me up, that crazy Ross always chasing Rachel; and that Matt LeBlank, he's a fine actor.
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:3, Funny)
itwales webmaster
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:3, Funny)
(Linux + thttpd)
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:2)
Come on, you can do better that that. Where's the vitriol?
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:3)
eagle:~$ telnet www.itwales.com 80
Trying 137.44.2.121...
telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused
eagle:~$ telnet www.itwales.com 80
Trying 137.44.2.121...
Connected to cscymru.swan.ac.uk.
Escape character is '^]'.
GET / HTML/1.0
HTTP/1.0 200 Document Follows
Content-Length: 705
Content-Type: text/html
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 16:11:50 GMT
Last-Modified: Mon, 28 Jan 2002 15:24:44 GMT
Server: OmniHTTPd/2.08
It's running this OmniHTTPd [internet.com]. I never used it, so I don't know if it's good or not. But it indicates the server is running 95/98 or NT.
And we all know that just Linux (or BSD, or your favorite Unix flavor) can stand the power of an Alan Cox interview being slashdotted.
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:1)
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:2)
Well, we could try using it to fight the forces of evil, like this:
Hey, guys, did you hear that there's a company [microsoft.com] that wants to take over the world? And uses all kinds of dirty tricks to do it, destroying innovation and competition [microsoft.com]? Better got to their Web site [microsoft.com] and read up, so you can know your enemy [microsoft.com]!
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:1)
[btw, moderators, this is a joke and not flamebait, so bugger off.]
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:2)
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:1)
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:1)
[Especially if the Win2k system isn't the patchwork quilt it needs to be... Because those "harmless little lines" we all see in our logs will otherwise bring the server down all on their own as it goes off on a little worm-spreading spree.]
That said, I doubt that the 'Slashdotting' of the website was due to the OS. Doesn't the bottleneck usually occur before the traffic hits the actual server? Sure, a fast server can keep the bottleneck at bay a little better than a slow one... But if you have too many hits coming in at the same time then isn't it safe to bet that a lot of the traffic never even meets the OS?
If x= number of hits per second that Windows can handle, and x-2 = number of hits that the server's connection can handle, then it doesn't matter if Linux can handle x^10 hits. Linux might fare slightly better, but when the hits go over the limit that the connection can handle, neither OS is going to make a significant difference.
Microsoft's connections are capable of handling way more hits than any individual machine of theirs could ever handle.
-Sara
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:2)
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:1)
Kidding. Kidding. I never said that Windows 2000 was not a good OS. I'd just never think of putting it on a server when a perfectly good distro of Linux was within reach. Personal preference.
-Sara
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:2)
On the desktop I use a mix of Linux and Windows XP Pro, although I tend to gravitate more to Windows XP Pro.
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:1)
> There are times when I fear the raw destructive power of Slashdot readers, especially when someone says, "Look! Over there! It's Alan Cox!"
Thank Bog it wasn't Linus -- or Rob and Kathleen on their honeymoon.
Re:Remarkable: Already slashdotted (Score:3, Informative)
Oh well (Score:1)
RedHat payes him to be a kernal hacker...
Pretty cool.
Nex6
Mirror here: (Score:5, Informative)
silly gov't (Score:2, Interesting)
Not that similar things don't happen in the U.S., but i don't think Dubya has ever attended one of these.
Re:silly gov't (Score:5, Funny)
MS might get him to show up if they start(?) touting embedded windows for ICBM missle guidance systems, with one-click 'Kill Evil Axis' processing.
Re:silly gov't (Score:4, Interesting)
Gates has the arrogant paternalism that all too often comes with great wealth. Gotta look after the little people, y'know.
Re:silly gov't (Score:2)
Re:silly gov't (Score:1)
Some do. Some succumb to dementia, and some just make the same stupid mistakes over and over again.
Good, fair interview (Score:4, Funny)
In fact, I think that AC provided a fair and balanced overview of the state of Linux and open-source software.
RMS (Score:2)
Re:Good, fair interview (Score:1)
Great interview, BTW.
Open source definition in Beginners' Notes (Score:2)
Source code == kernel? (Score:3, Informative)
From the article (sidebox):
Oops, I didn't know that "source code" and "kernel" are synonyms. ;-)
Microsoft? (Score:1)
Alan and Linus (Score:1)
Cox on governments adopting open source software (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a very pragmatic way to look at it. Obviously, moving government offices to (GNU/)Linux and KOffice or StarOffice would save taxpayer money in per-seat licenses. The costs of platform migration, service, and especially user training might eat up those savings, however. In addition, the public, which is under the Desktop Monopoly's thumb, would demand interoperability with government agencies. ("I'm sorry, I can't read your .doc file. Could you reformat it to take out this feature which StarOffice can't handle?" "It's a freaking Word document! How hard does it have to be for you to read it?!")
I also wonder about the unfair competition argument which MS and any other proprietary developer might raise. If governments mandate -- and contribute code to -- free software, is that government unlawfully competing with private enterprise? And even if it's lawful, is it politically feasible? Here in the U.S., folks would be skeptical if they felt like the U.S. government was setting up their own computing standard as a public monopoly in order to take down Microsoft.
The political considerations aren't limited to the perception that (pick a government or agency) is in Microsoft's pocket. It also raises questions about the government's role in steering the direction of technology, and whether government could usurp the roles of both software companies and free software developers in declaring standards.
Re:Cox on governments adopting open source softwar (Score:1)
Re:Cox on governments adopting open source softwar (Score:1)
It's better to get it all over with sometime, and then you'll be out from under MS's thumb for a long time. And if the government can afford to pay a billion dollars for a big airplane to drop bombs on people, surely they can cugh up some money so they wouldn't be supporting a monopoly!
As for document compatibility, hopefully StarOffice and friends can gracefully deal with features it can't use. And anyway, is it really that hard for people to save as HTML?
And as for government support of Open Source, is using open source stuff any worse than using MS software?
Re:Cox on governments adopting open source softwar (Score:5, Insightful)
The real question is, what services are considered so basic as to deserve to be free of the shackles of private interests. Private interests are always directed at a profitable consumer base, not a consumer base with needs. I think, if you say that computing is going to be a fundamental part of your infrastructure (like, broadcasting, roads, etc), you have every right to prefer solutions that are free of private interest influences. Sure, it might cost more in training, migration, etc, but at least you arn't placing important services that your country relys on in the hands of so-and-so's markting plans. The justification is doubly so when the only (real) private-interest solution is doing everything in its power (and thats a lot of power, in MS's case) to minimize competition. The government has every right to say, "Look, if MS allowed competition, then sure, we'd favour domestic market stimulation over the costs associated with riding on the back of private interests. There are enough disperate private interests to garauntee long term viability of this buy-in should this investment fail or suddenly change horses." However, when you go with an MS infrastructure, you're placing all your eggs in one basket, thus giving you a vested interest in their success. In the governments situation, thats the very thing they should be free of. (Good example: Enron. In hiding the details and placing all their eggs in the Enron basket, old boys club notwithstanding, the government effectively screwed a fair number of its citizens in not 'tampering with the market'.) If anything, staying with MS software interferes with the market more than trying to knock MS down a few notches by preferring the only real cost effective alternative, free software.
If there were more than 2 truely viable commercial OS's, I'd say, who cares, but the government is really just doing the market a disservice by not placing a 'preferred' status with 'competitors' (even if said competitor is being forced to give away said software for free because of the barrier to entry of the market that the Intels and MSs have created).
Just my two cents. The whole blind-faith thing that the market works itself out is a successful sell on behalf of large companies. When you look at countries that have fostered the fastest growth in their economy, they've done it through government regulation and placing 'preferred' status' on solutions based on their long term benifit to the economy. It's not by bolstering up the champion of the market at the time the decisions are being made, which is why I think the government, for the sake of their citizens at large, should be going out of their way to not do MS any favours (and the way MS acts, leaving MS alone is a favour in itself.)
Re:Cox on governments adopting open source softwar (Score:3, Interesting)
First off, there are costs involved with training for MS products.
Everbady says "Everybody knows how to use office" yet corporations spend million off dollars traing people on these tool every year.
So its not totla trainng costs, its the training cost difference.
The initail incorporation of a GUI running on Linux might have an incresed cost, but that would lessen to todays training costs in a year.
So it would be cheaper to go with an OS desktop.
Thats just training and liscencing. A much bigger piece of the IT budget goes to hardware upgrades and maintainance. properly intergrated, all those cost go down dramatically.
I'm sorry, I can't read your
this would be a need, which would get filled. probably by Microsoft.
Plus I have yet to have a problem opening a
Re:Cox on governments adopting open source softwar (Score:2)
Law and the free market are the ultimate monopolistic social programs of Government (after all, it's not like there are privatized courts). So how would this be "unlawful"? Unjust is another question. But since government defines law, I doubt it would be "unlawful".
Re:Cox on governments adopting open source softwar (Score:1)
Don't forget that the NSA has already released a prototype of its more secure Linux, without a whole lot of complaint along these lines.
Re:Cox on governments adopting open source softwar (Score:2, Funny)
Ooh, Alan, I hope you aren't expecting a Christmas card from RMS this year. I can practically hear the scratch of the pencil crossing you out.
Re:Cox on governments adopting open source softwar (Score:1)
Okay, so most of us don't share pre-formatted documents with our governments every day, but the news media do; If the UK Gov't rejected .DOCs from the BBC, requesting say .RTFs instead, the BBC would be sure to do an article or two about it on the radio, and probably on their prime TV news spot. That'd get the discussions going, and increase awareness that .DOC is not the only format.
Snnnnnoooooree.....zzzzzzz (Score:3, Insightful)
The answers given were good, to the point and basically good answers.
THE QUESTIONS SUCKED !
This has too be one of the shortest most boring interviews with Alan Ive seen. Alan doesnt seem to be as forthcoming with tangents as some interviewees. But thats him, me id talk about everything under the sun.
Long story short, and a note to interviewers, If you actually get time to ask someone like this questions in the future, give some thought to the questions youre going to ask, this one about put me to sleep.
Re:Snnnnnoooooree.....zzzzzzz (Score:1)
Marketing? (Score:4, Interesting)
Alan: That is really a job for the vendors, and I think they are doing a good job. There is a difference between effective marketing and claiming to be the one true solution to all problems. Linux is not the one true solution (if such a thing truthfully ever can exist), but we are working on it.
For as much grassroots effort there is in marketing, there's still a long way to go, and I don't really see linux vendors attacking this at all. I'm talking about general mass media. MS has ads in every magazine (even linux ones!) but I don't think I've ever seen a RedHat ad in anything but linux magazines (preaching to the choir).
Some distros are in BestBuy and CompUSA these days, which is a good first step. The next step, imo, is some general print ads to get the visibility up. Perhaps RH could trade some consulting/installations with some regional business magazines in exchange for adspace? I'm thinking about something like Crain's in our area (detroit, and I know it's in some other areas too).
People reading magazines are often decision makers, but they don't want to get too technically savvy. Move the mountain to Mohammed, take the message to the streets, etc.
Thoughts?
Why Red Hat would do it? (Score:1)
And the Operating System itself would be promoted by hardware makers.
Re:Why Red Hat would do it? (Score:1)
Re:Marketing? (Score:1)
Of course, the tobacco argument is that advertising doesn't make people start using the (generic) product, just to switch from brand X to brand Y.
To make people start using the (generic) Linux, mass-market advertising would be necessary...
Linux on the desktop is a matter of ambition (Score:3, Insightful)
The is nothing I would like more than to see Linux take over the desktop. But I cannot see that happening any time soon.
Right now Linux can fill the basic requirements for the desktop - even though it might be a little challenging setting it up just right if you not a techie.
However, as soon you want to do anything remotely advanced like knowledge or document management (that is integration between office products and content management systems) I see no real alternative to MS Office on a Windows platform.
You can do really amazing things integrating Word, Outlook and Internet Explorer into a content management system. On Linux we are still waiting for StarOffice 6 to be released.
I have used StarOffice 6 beta and I am impressed, but on the Windows platform we are talking advanced systems integration and not just regular word processing or emailing.
That is why I think that the question of using Linux on the desktop is a question of ambition. You can use Linux all you want, but you will not be able to integrate you work processes any time soon like you can on a Windows platform.
Re:Linux on the desktop is a matter of ambition (Score:3, Insightful)
Over the years, I've found many applications that I wanted to use, only to simply give up because a binary package was not available. At 1am on a weekday, my dedication to installing an app is limited to either typing less than 5 commands, or walking through a gui installer. If anything hiccups along the way, my stance is (excuse the french) 'Fuck it, I guess I don't really need this'. Which basically limits my 1am install sessions to Apache, PHP, MySQL, and StarOffice. The 3 apps that I can './configure;make;make install' in my sleep, and the app with a gui installer.
So, why aren't we using more gui installers? I realize that there are quite a few zealots out there that are absolute control freaks. They feel the need to get the source and mess with it. That's really cool in my opinion. I've done it once or twice as well, and I can see the benefits of having the source available. But that doesn't mean that I think source code is a great way to distribute an application.
So use RPM's/DEB's/apt-get. Well that's all great, but I'd rather not use a platform specific packaging system to install applications that aren't all that platform specific. Plus RPMs have their own cute little version of the 'Windows DLL Hell'. It's call RPM Dependancy Hell. And at 1am, that shit flies about as well as autoconf bitching about a missing required library. I don't believe that I need to repeat my stance on that.
So why can't I just get a package that has everything required to run an application bundled with it??? Obviously I don't want an entire GNOME install when I try to install gedit, but if GNOME declared a standard 1.0 base, there really isn't any reason why I can't have binary compatability with any GNOME 1.0 libs. That includes updates to those libs.
Now obviously there will be compatability issues between architectures. So I'm not saying that autoconf doesn't have a place in all of this. It most certainly does. But why rely on it (or even RPMs) when joe sixpack already understands how to simply click 'next, next, finish'?
I hope I got my point across. This isn't a rant directed at the poster of the parent. Sorry if it seemed that way at all. This is really just a general rant of mine that seemed to fit this thread of discussion. By the way, I'm already working on the packaging system I speak of. So I'm not bitching without contributing.
Re:Linux on the desktop is a matter of ambition (Score:2)
Maybe you should start up a project to make a standard GUI installer that everyone can use.
I just use apt-get, and I love how easy it is.
steveha
Re:Linux on the desktop is a matter of ambition (Score:2)
Open Scourge (Score:3, Insightful)
Finally, a good quote! Seriously he has a great point. When anti-Open people talk about 'Free Software' and the such they almost always talk about the economics of it.
Open Source isn't about money, it's not about economics. Red Hat shows that they can be the builders of the bridge. They can put together all those pieces of steel. Alan has just helped go over the plans and helped make sure they bridge doesn't go down.
Hell, I can get bridge plans off the internet now... but I need someone to build it for me! In this view Red Hat would be the people to call.
Cox is the Ginsberg of Linux. (Score:3, Interesting)
Alan, write a book!
Re:Cox is the Ginsberg of Linux. (Score:1)
Excellent article, but.. (Score:5, Funny)
that picture at the top..
Re:Excellent article, but.. (Score:1)
Re:Excellent article, but.. (Score:1)
Linux not on the desktop (Score:1)
Re:Linux not on the desktop (Score:1, Interesting)
The same could be (and has been) said about BeOS and NeXT on the desktop. Without Microsoft's OEM contracts, who's to say what else might have been available at retail stores? Linux boosters aren't the only ones who can gripe about possible opportunities denied - sure, the opportunity might have flopped, but Microsoft decided that we'll never know, will we?
Re:Linux not on the desktop (Score:1)
Re:Linux not on the desktop (Score:2)
Re:Linux not on the desktop (Score:1)
No, it doesn't.
Is Fry's a major distributor of home computers?
No, it isn't.
Do Dell, Compaq, HP, IBM, or any other significant retailer of home systems pre-install Linux?
No, they don't.
Simple as that.
Re:Linux not on the desktop (Score:1)
I disagree with this. To understand my reasoning go to all of the major PC vendors and try to order a computer with Linux or better yet, without any Microsoft products. Have fun because it is a pain in the ass and sometimes impossible. Why does Linux have a market for servers? Well that is simply because sys admins are smarter than the average user and know what is better.
Alan on the dark side? (Score:1)
So, what exactly are his responsibilities at Microsoft?
Ask Alan all you want. (Score:4, Interesting)
Erm.. yeah right. (Score:3, Insightful)
Alan Cox is one of the most influential IT innovators in the world.
Come on.. the guy does a lot of great work and all, but most influential INNOVATORS??? We're talking a Unix clone here.
No, I'm not agreeing with the fact that Bill Gates gets named as one of the great innovators of all time (yesterday). In that light, naming A. Cox one of the most influential IT innovators is a bit over the top. Sorry.
Re:Erm.. yeah right. (Score:2)
Linux is not an exact clone of UNIX. The first version of Linux was a clone of the most important bits of UNIX, but it has since grown in many different directions.
For one example, consider the HTTP daemon that runs inside the kernel, serving up static pages without leaving kernel mode and seamlessly handing dynamic pages off to Apache. There had never been anything like it before (although Microsoft has copied that idea for their web server).
Read Linux Weekly News. There is always new stuff shaking in the kernel development. An O(1) scheduler! Copy-on-write to make fork() really fast! Reverse-mapping in the VM subsystem! I don't know enough about the OS landscape to tell you which of these exist in which OSes, but I'm pretty sure that many of them are brand-new.
It's like some company made the most advanced car ever, and it had hundreds of cool little features that make it safer or nicer or whatever. If you are standing next to it, you just say "It's a car." But an automotive engineer can look under the hood and know better.
Look under the hood of Linux development.
steveha
Hypocricy (Score:2, Interesting)
Oh really ? And what about Linux gurus being on the payroll of the hyperlink "inventors" ? Or is this ok because he exploits them ?
"Alan Cox will be conducting the BT sponsored Public Lecture at the Taliesen Theatre in Swansea, Wales, U.K. on the 5th March."
Re:Hypocricy (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Hypocricy (Score:1)
I am just judging Cox by his own claimed moral standards.
I personally wouldn't mind if Cox would receive a salary from the devil himself - provided he doesn't air such moral BS and keeps working on Linux.
Ex-graduates? (Score:3, Funny)
How does one become an ex-graduate?
And SUCS is still running (RedHat) Linux... (Score:1)
best question & answer (Score:1)
itwales.com: 'Open source' means software is owned by everyone, and anyone can contribute to it. Is the sharing of ideas important to you? Was choosing to work within the free software community an ethical decision?
Alan: Technically the software is still owned by the person who wrote it, but that is more of a credit thing - which is important in the community. For me it wasn't really an ethical decision, it's simply the right way to do engineering. You don't build reliable bridges by refusing to let anyone see the plans.
There is a real problem in both the US and Western Europe today with people trying to own and control ideas, but that is something bigger than just software or free software. Ironically it is having the same effects on free software as other things - all the great innovation is moving to Eastern Europe, India and South America.
i couldn't agree more. it's about time someone was able to put this into just a few sentences.
i wish Alan would write a book using the above as his thesis.
GO Alan, you rock!
Linux on the desktop (Score:3, Insightful)
Key will be the requirement for Micorsoft to sell a barebones OS. That resolution is essential. Otherwise, monopoly power precludes any competition in the key desktop markets.
Also key is the Netscape(AOL) law suit to gain a right to fairly market a browser application. Fair means that when an individual customer decides to buy the Netscape browser absolutely no money goes to Microsoft for Internet Explorer. Otherwise, consumers are out of the loop and no longer decide the success or failure of products.
The Watchmen (Score:1)
Always wondered where he finds time... (Score:2)
During the relatively early days of Linux, when I was deciding whether I could implement a particular network test application in user-space on Linux (could, rather easily as it turns out, and the app is still in use), I sent Alan an e-mail with a brief description of my approach and a question about feasibility. The next morning I arrived at work to find a reply that included
-
Kind words as to the coolness of the concept,
-
An assessment of the basic approach (favorable, to my relief),
-
Pointers to sample code that was useful, and
-
Pointers into particular places in the source files where I would have to put hooks to do a kernel-level implementation, should the user-space approach run into problems.
Is there a convenient and reliable way that I can buy this guy a beer over the Internet?Re:Dammit! (Score:1)
Re:Regarding the Kernel....... (Score:1)
Re:Cost efficiency my ass.exe (Score:1)
I have never used Unix, but on my 386 gateway and my new p100 box, potato runs super sweet as. Stable. The only problems I have had are problems I cause, thru miss configuration, or power cuts as you mentioned.
No loss of data for me, In fact, when I was trying to get my 386 running debian ( which involved a lot of swapping the hdd from one box to another ), I even ripped the massive 200 mb hdd's cable out while it potato was booting, and it came up with an amusing error message ( written by a 14 year old with too much time, of course )... curious, I plugged the cable back in, and not only did it continue booting as if it was normal for me to rip ide cables out while booting, the drive had no data loss at all, that I was aware of
And as for cost effective? Well... I got both my 386 AND potato, for FREE.
I use my p100 for doing more intensive tasks, such as compiling bits and pieces... for example currently im working on a part of proftpd so that on my p100 ( internal ), proftpd on each fork_server() the proper external ip address of my 386 gateway is read in and sent out with the PASV command. I notice gcc and g++ compile a lot faster and often give more informative compile error messages than MSVC, which, is not free.
And of course, my 386 being the gateway and all, it gladly provides you with this post at 0 load as usual
ps: Watch your ass, Cost effective is lining up to take a big bite out of it