Slashdot Mirror
Ian Murdock: Linux is a Process, Not a Product
securitas writes "Debian founder Ian Murdock says that Linux is a process, not a product. He also says that the product mentality 'misses the entire point of Linux and the open-source development model.' Because Linux is made up of many different components developed on independent timeframes, Murdock posits, to refer to Linux as a product is to strip it of its dynamism and closes its inherently open nature. Instead, he says that Linux should be viewed as a shared platform and infrastructure technology, and that business models should reflect that or else Linux risks becoming proprietary, closed and just another cookie-cutter piece of software."
Umm ... yeah ... Debian ... exactly what I picture when I think of a Dynamic Constantly Moving and Developing Product.
Well, it is.
Debian is not a product. Debian Stable (currently Debian Woody) is effectively a product. But Debian is a project.
Debian Stable may only have a new release every couple of years, making it seem very stodgy and safe and conservative and slow. But the Debian project really is dynamic, constantly moving, and constantly developing. Try installing Debian Unstable, and you'll probably find it's a little more constantly moving than you want....
-Rob
Linux is a Product created from an Open Source Process.
"Times may change, but standards must remain the same." - George Carlin.
Interestingly, this "cake" metaphor was used in an article on USAToday's website just a couple of days ago: http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/technolog y/maney/2003-07-30-maney_x.htm
...]
"SCO claims it rummaged around in its closet and found that since the mid-1990s it has owned the rights to certain core source code for the waning Unix operating system. SCO says it then realized that the Unix code somehow got copied into the core of Linux, an increasingly popular "open-source" operating system developed and modified by thousands of independent programmers and owned by no one.
[... snip para.
This whole thing is not unlike finding your grandmother's recipe for Bundt cake, realizing it's similar to the recipe in a number of cookbooks, suing the biggest cookbook publisher, then sending letters to everyone who makes a Bundt cake saying they should send you some money or risk legal action. Not a good way to make friends."
What's really nice about this is that it means some of the mainstram press (do you really get any more mainstream than USAToday?) is finally starting to criticize the SCO FUD.
Well, it's not that hard. Anyone who can do a Windoze install can do Red Hat and the Red Hat is easier. Of course there's worlds of free help available through your local LUG. If your want your hand held and can't find a friend to do it, you can wait for an install fest or ask around for someone like me who will go to your house or business for a modest fee.
You are right about the distinction between the distros, but it's best to explain the whole free software thing first. You can do that in about 10 minutes. Intereste users can then read the free software site on their own. I've made a little newbie lectures, including "Where does free software come from." to sum it up for myself and others. After that, the different distros make sense and you can start to try and match the user with a distro that will make them happy.
I think that's what Ian was getting at, keeping the user informed and meeting their needs. It's the user's needs that are important. Everything possible should be done to make meeting those needs easy and the user should never be kept in the dark about the way things work. Lock-in is an evil thing and I hope he's not right about the intentions of some vendors.
Even if he's right, lock in is still difficult with free software. I recently moved a machine from Red Hat 7.3 to Debian stable and was able to keep all of my data. Some of the user configurations were off, but it was much easier than any Windoze move I've ever made.
Propriatory drivers and closed source software tacked onto free software definatly degrades the user experience. I've got a wireless network card from a company that touts, "Linux support". It's got some RPMs that may work on Red Hat 7.3 and 8.0, but I've had a very hard time making them run under Debian. It came with "source" that included a precompiled object module. I've had a hard time matching up that silly module with a particular kernel and I'm about fed up with it. I may try to set up a Red Hat box, but it will be a dead box that will have a kernel fixed for freaking ever. Changing the sofware around it will be a pain. That's not Red Hat's fault, it's the card maker's fault. It shows where things can go.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.