Slashdot Mirror
Eric Raymond: Why Open Source will Rule
DNapalm writes "A very interesting two part interview with Raymond from ZDNet, talking about the success of open source and Linux on the desktop, among other things. Check out Part I and Part II (I liked part II)." Raymond also asserts that Microsoft could have killed Linux if only they'd started a little earlier.
You mean like plan9?
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
In case you haven't noticed, RedHat already charges for the boxed version of their linux distro. You can still get the .ISO's from their download sites. The thing with StarOffice is that it'ss closed-source software and will be kept by SUN as such.However, RedHat Linux is a distribution of mainly (99%) open-source software that under the GPL. RedHat has no power to release a distro without releasing the sources.
.ISO's of the distro itself (thus forcing you to buy it) while still releasing the sources. Somehow, I doubt this would happen.
Of course, they could do it the same way SUSE does things, ie. make it impossible to download
Well, another one zapped by the Microsoft machine. In their context, LaTeX and gnuplot are the standard. Ever wonder why the Los Alomos preprint server offers the papers in that format?
The Mongrel Dogs Who Teach
Its an indirect cycle. While you are not directly getting paid for the originating product - you are getting paid for custom applications that are built using the products. Ie web based apache/php/mysql applications. Companies that are paying programmers to do development work get the distinction of being more knowledgable (They know the code inside and out..) and as a result, I think this is definitely marketable to people requiring customized apps using the core technology. Couple this with CS majors working on open source projects and those working on projects for the love of programming, I think it is a sustainable, profitable model.
> Furthermore, his argument is that if Microsoft had started its FUD campaign back in 1998, no one would
> have bought into Linux. This is similar to charging Microsoft with failure to have a crystal ball. Back in 1998, Linux was
> barely a blip on anyone's radar.
Actually, Linux was on a number of radars. A lot of ISPs (predominantly mom-&-pop shops with little spare cash) were using Linux (& *BSD) for their servers because they couldn't afford Win NT.
And knowledge of some of this usage must have filtered back to Redmond. Remember, the infamous Halloween Papers (which were published in 1998) were written in August of 1998 after careful study of how Linux & Apache are written.
What is more cripling for Eric Raymond's argument that MS could have FUDed Linux to death is that these memos clearly state that FUD will NOT work against Open Source Software. I don't understand is why Raymond didn't remember this assertion: after all, he published the original documents.
Geoff
I think I see a trend here. Maybe for them it really would be easier to muzzle the entire internet than to produce p
> The thing with StarOffice is that it'ss closed-source software and will be kept by SUN as such.
Only the proprietary features they add that are not already in the OpenOffice project. OOffice is the baseline for SO, not the other way around. So, the great majority of SO source will be available.