Slashdot Mirror
Linus Holds Forth On the Future of Linux
colinmc151 writes "As part of Geekcruises' Linux Lunacy cruise to Alaska, Linus Torvalds was interviewed and answered questions about where he sees the future of Linux with a particular eye towards developers. Great stuff."
A very interesting read. However, I was surprised to find no comments at all concerning OSX, wrt the future of linux on the desktop. I mean, if anything in the last two years has obviated the need for linux on the desktop, this is it.
It sounds like getting onto the desktop is important to him. He talks about the problems affecting kernel space - poor support from latop hardware mfrs being a big one... but really the kernel is NOT what's holding up the success of linux on the desktop. We need easier setup and a useable interface.
An interesting read, but as ever i never seem to get an understanding of how Linux is going to convert the other 99% to microsoft.
Torvalds might be saviour to the linux community, but thats where it stops. Frankly, The OS either needs some drastic marketting plans or a couple of well placed PR people if it ever wants to make some headway. Bill Gates & Microsoft didn't get rich of the quality of their programming.
Apparently people think it's allright when you have a bias for superior technology, or for example, a bias that the earth is round rather than flat. But when it comes to a bias in favor of free (as in freedom, not beer) then all of a sudden it becomes so taboo - not even Linus wants to have that bias. I think that is such a shame, hasn't history shown that it's a worthy and rational bias by now?
Just my opinion.
Wasn't that interesting. I think it was transcribed from audio by someone who doesn't know computing. "ifdev"s ha!
Obviously, someone does. Look around you - the two highest ranking topics as of the time I'm writing are on this question. People are using moderator points to push them up, a strong indicator of interest.
I've personally switched from SGI Irix to Linux to MacOS X on the desktop, for both home and work. There have been some articles, in Infoworld and elsewhere, about normally geeky guys who have seen the virtues of Apple's creations. And CmdrTaco is the proud owner of a Mac laptop, which he apparently liked so much that he created an Apple section here on Slashdot.
Linux on the desktop seems to have done its best to imitate Windows on the desktop. If you want a user interface better than a pale imitation of Microsoft, then MacOS X is your OS.
For cost reasons, I don't think this is much of a threat to Linux or Microsoft. But I think it's a very interesting phenomenon that deserves more coverage.
D
He is against the very idea of microkernel
This is like saying that a husband is against the very idea of vacuuming, rather than simply doesn't want to vacuum. From what I have read of Torvald's opinion, the difficulty was that a microkernel isn't as easy to write, and can be less efficient (but on the flip side can be dramatically more secure and stable - see QNX). That's great that he feels that as a developer, but as a user, or as someone choosing products for embedded systems, etc, I think I'd take a microkernel.
Linux should not have a goal market share. It doesn't make sense for Linux (you can argue all you want). Linux should focus on being the best technological solution. It's as simple as that.
> This is like saying that a husband is against the very idea of vacuuming, rather than simply doesn't want to vacuum.
Linus has gone further than that, to slanderous accusations against microkernel research in general, stating that they were in it for the research dollars, knowing they had an inferior architecture. Tanenbaum wasn't mentioned by name, but it's fairly obvious who the comments were directed at. This behavior to me is beyond the pale, and completely unacceptable. He may have a fine OS, microkernel concepts or no, but he has no standing to be throwing around allegations like that.
This is a guy who learns fast when he wants to, an excellent x86 assembly hacker, but he doesn't know when to keep his trap shut when he doesn't know about something.
I've finally had it: until slashdot gets article moderation, I am not coming back.
I think this is the wrong kind of comparison to be making. I for one never saw linux as a complete windows replacement. The desktop side of things is sort of a slowly evolving blob, as far as I've ever seen. Luckily "how it looks," isn't the reason why most people claim to use linux.
Apple is a corporation. MacOS is (for the most part) closed source. That means that when you purchase software from them, you are stuck getting updates and fixes from them. I wouldn't say apple is as bad as microsoft, not yet anyway, but lots of stuff points out that Apple is working towards locking in their users. For example, the fiasco about security updates to the older versions of OSX a few days ago.
I always hear people chastising Microsoft about their evil DRM-enhanced future. I don't see why people don't notice Apple doing it RIGHT NOW. Look at iTunes. You can burn your music, or you can put it on your iPod. I have an Archos mp3 player. I can't put music I buy from iTunes on it even though I've purchased the music. I'm by no means putting down Apple's use of DRM, after all, they have to make money somehow, but it's important to realize that they are just another corporation, and in parallel, they are just out to make money.
With open source you don't have to rely on a central source for fixes, you can fix it yourself, you can modify the appliations to suit your needs and whatnot. MacOS X may look nice, but it's no develper's heaven. That's what linux is for.
When all freedom is outlawed only the outlaws have freedom
Hi,
Linux on the desktop seems to have done its best to imitate Windows on the desktop
Another poster tried, but let me clarify.
KDE looks and acts like Windows. This is the reason a lot of Linux people don't like it or use it, myself included.
Gnome also looks like Windows at first, but less so. Lots of cool things going on in Gnome, all not very Windows-like.
XFCE, Blackbox, ICEWM, and Windowmaker look nothing like windows nor do they act like it.
"a pale imitation of Microsoft" would be inaccurate when describing these projects.
We should not speak of "Linux on the desktop," because no such single entity exists. There are, instead, many different projects providing desktop environments supported across not only Linux but the BSD family. And these vary from simple GUI+little functionality to full enviroments with internal protocols, etc.
While the visible desktop portion of MacOSX is very inviting from both aesthetics and functionality viewpoints, OSX has other problems which I believe will slow its adoption by the general user base (the not-so-technical who are beginning to care about issues like privacy+computers, years of Microsoft security failings, the DMCA, and notice that some countries are adopting Open Source Software as a mandate):
-Large portions of OSX is proprietary software. Fine: but so often it's touted as an open platform.
-The DRM architecture in iTunes is really no different than M$ DRM (more eloquently stated in another post )
-Cost.
Can we agree to finally put this canard to rest? No OS has more variety on the desktop than Linux. Yes, two popular desktop environments - KDE and Gnome - are similar to Windows. Fluxbox and Windowmaker, popular as well, aren't close. XFce4 looks like OS-X. Ion attempts to replicate the terminal. Claiming the Linux desktops are "a pale imitation of Microsoft" is either disingenuous or uninformed.