LWN Year in Review

Lars Larsen writes "Linux Weekly News has a nice Linux timeline for 1998. " The best comment is the little block of Jesse Berst quotes his opinions changing from 'Linux Will Never go Mainstream' to 'I've always said that Linux could be a serious Challanger'

I've been there!

[Anonymous Coward]

I've actually stood outside Berst's office!

I was taking a *mumble*SQL Server*mumble* class in Bellevue, WA (Bellevue and Redmond are essentially the same city). The class was on the 2nd floor of a "professional building". Jesse Berst's ZDAnchorDesk was in one suite on the first floor. Looked like they had all of 3 rooms.

I didn't know who he was at the time, though.

Whew!

[Anonymous Coward]

It's been one helluva busy year! And they say
Linux is supposed to increase over 200% in '99.
I can't wait! Woohoo! =)

Good quote

[Skyshadow]

I didn't see it the first time around, but in the
timeline is this quote (quoted from memory):

"All the open source movement needs is a grown-up
to step in and lead it without all the petty
bickering".

Hmm, sounds like he saw a /. KDE/Gnome flamewar...

----

Berst has a purpose

[bhurt]

He's the archtypeal PHB in his reactions to Linux, and as such serves as a good yardstick to the "corporate mindset" (who, incidently, get their opinions retail from Jesse among others- Management By Reading Magazines).

Let's see. He's hit:
1) Ignorance ("What's Linux?")
2) Denial ("It's not worth writing about")
3) Dismissive ("Could you get fired for using Linux?")
4) Grudging Acceptance with Reservations ("I always said Linux could be a contender. Not on the desktop, though")

Inform Berst

[HBK-4G]

I think somebody should point this out to Jesse...numerous times. send him emails pointing to the LWN timeline and specifically his highly irregular and contradictory statements. its always nice to catch a windbag and take the wind out of his sails.

Been on before

[linuxci]

Like someone said before. Slashdot have already posted this article a while back. My guessing is the contributors to slashdot don't read their site often enough.
But that's a good thing as if they did it would just die becasue they'd spend so long reading they wouldn't update it, people would then stop reading, etc, etc - so a few repeated articles is worthwhile as long as CmdrTaco, Sengan, Hemos, etc don't get addicted to their site and start reading it.
After all /. is the No. 1 way of wasting time when you should be doing something else.
Seriously though - this is a great site!
--

This can't be more than two weeks old!

[JerkBoB]

Damn but you people should read your own website!

Linux 1998 Timeline by HeUnique on Thursday December 24th@05:12 23

http://slashdot.org/articles/98/12/24/0511211.shtm l

Look familiar? Why, yes, it's the same bloody article!

idea to stop repeats?

[adraken]

slashdot could create a system of
3-5 simple and significant category/keywords
that could be assigned to each article.

for example (this article could be assigned these keywords):
"Linux Weekly News" "timeline "1998"

these keywords are SO obvious (or should be), that if the article was ever to be possibly submitted again, the same or very similar keywords would reappear.

categories for version numbers (obviously needed for version announcements such as new WINE versions or new GIMP versions.) and the most significant URL given are necessary also.

for example (this article):
(version number N/A) "http://lwn.net/1999/features/1998timeline/"

again, the version number and the most significant URL would HAVE to be repeated in order for a repeat article to reappear.

then when the authors submit their articles, a search can quickly be run through all slashdot articles using this keyword system and the list of really common matches can be shown and then the author can determine whether or not it is worthy enough to run the article again or run it because the keyword system screwed up...

i just can't stand it when all the comments that fill up this space are just flames and flames upon yet more flames about "repeated articles" "don't you read your own website!?!?"


also: since slashdot pulls the freshmeat new applist every once in a while, why can't it just scan through it for various programs that are of significant importance, such as WINE, GNOME, and make sure its a new version, then auto-submits it to an author.

bah these are simple ideas, i hope this makes it to someone who cares.. hmm might send it to rob...

-adraken

doh! this is v1.0 of the timeline

[adraken]

what was left out of the original synopsis is that this is v1.0 of the timeline with many additions and fixes to the other version which was posted a week ago.

hrm. maybe the story should have stated that, oh well
nomatter

Inform Berst

[cjs]

In fact, you shouldn't be pointing out these quotes to him because, having gone back and checked out the links, the quotes are misleading about what he said. For example, the quote

Is a Linux takeover likely? Give me a break. Of course not.

is from an article entitled `How Linux Could Kill Windows NT.' In the article he says, essentially, `These things are what Linux needs; if it gets them, Linux can kill NT. I don't think it's likely, but I think it's possible.' (And I'd like to note that two of those three requirements he gave are coming to fruition.)

Personally, I don't agree with his `risk of getting fired' assessment; in my experience in the corporate world, you don't get fired: you simply don't get to install a non-standard technology in the first place. But in his other two quotes, he says Linux is not likely to take over the mainstream. But, as he says in the last quote, he's always admitted the possibility, and this is clear if you read the articles themselves, rather than just the quotes.

So my question here is, why is someone from the Linux community misrepresenting someone who, before Linux really struck the press as a potential mainstream item, was writing articles with titles like `How Linux Could Kill Windows NT'? With folks like this on the team, who needs Microsoft to kill Linux?

cjs