Slashdot Mirror
Linus Torvalds' Benevolent Dictatorship
treebeard77 writes "BusinessWeek has posted Linus Torvalds interview '
The creator of Linux says "I can't be nasty" when leading the open-source movement since it's all built on trust and teamwork' "
← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)
If you found this interview interesting, I would recommend his book (ghost-written, of course), Just for Fun. It's suprisingly light reading.
Linus is just the maintainer of the general stable tree of the Linux kernel, he's not some kind of Linux czar.
There's a big difference between rule of an OS with an iron fist and maintainership of a kernel for an OS. Linus does a good job maintaining his project (the Linux kernel), so no one directly forks it.
Anyway, the article's a interview that ranges over his opinion on some patent issues.. not that you'd realize it from the post.
You're reading Slashdot. Of course you like Linux and pc hardware
What would make you think that? Microsoft still has a very solid lead in pretty much all server markets. Don't be fooled by Netcraft that only shows websites. Sites don't equal servers (Windows - whether apache or IIS - actually runs around 50% of servers - Linux - which is pretty much just Apache - is more popular with bulk hosts with many sites on one box) and web servers are just a small percentage of all servers.
And Linux is a distant 3rd on the desktop behind Windows and OS X.
No, actually it was as a free replacement for a unix-like system. The "replacement for windows" talk didn't start up for a fair while.
I wish Torvalds had used the word Alchemy instead of witchcraft, it is probably closer to what he was trying to say (in English at least).
*sigh*
"Murphy was an optimist" - O'Toole's commentary on Murphy's Law
IMPORTANT-READ CAREFULLY: This End-User License Agreement ("EULA") is a legal agreement between you (either an individual or a single entity) and Microsoft Corporation for the Microsoft software that accompanies this EULA, which includes computer software and may include associated media, printed materials, "online" or electronic documentation, and Internet-based services ("Software"). An amendment or addendum to this EULA may accompany the software. YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS EULA BY INSTALLING, COPYING, OR OTHERWISE USING THE SOFTWARE. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE, DO NOT INSTALL, COPY, OR USE THE SOFTWARE; YOU MAY RETURN IT TO YOUR PLACE OF PURCHASE FOR A FULL REFUND, IF APPLICABLE.
1. GRANT OF LICENSE. Microsoft grants you the following rights provided that you comply with all terms and conditions of this EULA:
1.1 Installation and use. You may install, use, access, display and run one copy of the Software on a single computer, such as a workstation, terminal or other device ("Workstation Computer"). The Software may not be used by more than one processor at any one time on any single Workstation Computer.
1.2 Mandatory Activation. The license rights granted under this EULA are limited to the first thirty (30) days after you first install the Software unless you supply information required to activate your licensed copy in the manner described during the setup sequence of the Software. You can activate the Software through the use of the Internet or telephone; toll charges may apply. You may also need to reactivate the Software if you modify your computer hardware or alter the Software. There are technological measures in this Software that are designed to prevent unlicensed use of the Software. Microsoft will use those measures to confirm you have a legally licensed copy of the Software. If you are not using a licensed copy of the Software, you are not allowed to install the Software or future Software updates. Microsoft will not collect any personally identifiable information from your Workstation Computer during this process.
1.3 Device Connections. You may permit a maximum of five (5) computers or other electronic devices (each a "Device") to connect to the Workstation Computer to utilize one or more of the following services of the Software: File Services, Print Services, Internet Information Services, and remote access (including connection sharing and telephony services). The five connection maximum includes any indirect connections made through "multiplexing" or other software or hardware which pools or aggregates connections. This five connection maximum does not apply to any other uses of the Software.
1.4 Remote Assistance/NetMeeting. The Software contains Remote Assistance and NetMeeting technologies that enable the Software or applications installed on the Workstation Computer (sometimes referred to as a host device) to be accessed remotely from other Devices. When you are using Remote Assistance or NetMeeting (or other software which provides similar functionality for a similar purpose) you may share your session with other users without any limit on the number of Device connections and without acquiring additional licenses for the Software. For Microsoft and non-Microsoft applications, you should consult the license agreement accompanying the applicable software or contact the applicable licensor to determine whether use of the software with Remote Assistance or NetMeeting is permitted without an additional license. As used above, a session means the experience delivered by the Software similar to when a user is using the input, output and display peripherals attached to the Workstation Computer.
1.5 Storage/Network Use. You may also store or install a copy of the Software on a storage device, such as a network server, used only to install or run the Software on your other Workstation Computers over an internal network; however, you must acquire and dedicate an additional license for each separate Workstation Computer on or from which the Software
* disclaimers that they aren't responsible for what happens to your computer when you run them.*
I'm just restoring one compaq for a friend here.. and just for kicks actually scrolled through the license of the os(microsoft provided).
basically the license gives so crappy terms on the product that they have to clash with my rights as a consumer.
anyways, and when the program isn't a 'cheap knock off' of the windows counterpart(from the ui, which is what matters for appearance..) then people complain that they're not what they're used to.
anyways, the main point of what torvalds had in this was: the innovation in the commercial market is mostly a marketin scam(for phb's to get them to buy it), it's not like ms has done anything seriously innovative themselfs either.
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Marketshare would be in physical machines. Applications would be meaningless and revenue would always be weaker for Linux. The actual count is probably impossible but I am sure some group out there has surveyed fortune 500 companies or something like that. I would also say that you wouldn't count every small hobby "server" sitting in somebody's closet.
IMAP and POP3 are standards not servers. Exchange and sendmail are not comparable. Sendmail is just an MTA. Exchange is an MTA as well as a calendar/collaboration tool. The equivalent would be Evolution which is not even on the scope.
I dunno, I think this might be at least kind of reliable.
Admittedly, this is the zeitgeist for google.ca. The google.com one doesn't show the OS statistics for some reason. Anyway, if you look it over, you find that Linux is about on par with Windows 95, with 1% of the share. Windows NT 4.0 still has twice Linux's share at 2%, and Windows ME and Mac OS are tied at 3% each. Windows 98, 2000, and XP take a whopping 85%, with 51% going to XP alone. All the Windowses combined make up 91% of the share. There's also that 5% other, and who knows what that is (UNIXes and unidentifiable Linuxes, perhaps? Maybe some of the older Mac OSes, too). Either way, while Linux is getting more and more ready for widespread, desktop use, it's clear it's not getting a lot of that currently.
GET THEM INSIDE THE VAULT!
Reading Comprehension 101. When referring to websites/webservers I said that Microsoft has IIS and Apache and Linux pretty much has Apache. I didn't think that was too hard to understand.
I agree with 100% of the rest of your post. Linux definitely is a strong #2 but it still has a huge hill to climb. Personally I love Linux on the server and have been running my own Slack server for over 5 years now.
But here's the most expansive article i've read about him online. Really connecting and interesting: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.11/
Jobs isn't the only one who built apple. Woz was just as instramental as the other Steve.
Yes. An appointed CEO who can be ousted, and a board of directors that is elected by shareholders with voting stock.
No. That is the new SCO. The old SCO became Tarantella and is still happily producing software, albeit not Unix.
SCO's chance to succeed vanished before The Santa Cruz Operation split into Tarantella and The SCO Group. There is no SCO, it's TSG. It's a shame it's called SCO.
The Unix-producing part of SCO was doomed, and it's likely that this strategy was considered back at the time of the split. Otherwise it would have made more sense to just sell off SCO's Unix assets and either rename the whole remainder of the company to Tarantella or keep the S.C.O. name, laying off the Unix developers. (Not that I would wish that on any of those people, some of whom I know and regard highly.)
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
What's interesting here is that the onus of responsibility falls on the GPL to allow these derivatives rather than taking the authors of the OGL to task for writing a GPL-incompatible license (despite the GPL's clear popularity when the OGL was written). What is particularly ironic about this incompability is that the Open Gaming Foundation claims to be "based on the Free Software GNU General Public License ". But even if you're not willing to do that, all is not lost -- what happened when you asked the copyright holders of the two works for permission to make this derivative? Copyrighted works can be licensed any number of ways to any number of other parties. Perhaps they would grant you special permission to make your work. Also, why is it any GPL licensor's duty to let you create such a derivative by default?
Linux is a kernel, not an operating system. GNU predates the release of the Linux kernel. The existence of GNU and/or the Linux kernel does not prevent Microsoft from continuing the development of their UNIX-like system nor does it prevent them from writing MS Office for any OS they wish (including any free software OS). It seems to me that Microsoft's decision to can a program you appear to want is best addressed by talking to them, not chastising RMS. It appears that the Free Software Foundation is not interested in throwing aside their goals for mere popularity:
Digital Citizen
And -- he doesn't have any kids, right? Two boys that might go around killing anyone who doesn't win Linux-based UT2K4 tournaments in Linus' name, right? Or terrorizing anyone who challenges the vision of the kernel?
Sorry to be picky with a perfectly funny post, but if you s/kids/sons/ then the story is correct. I can personally attest to that fact.Slashdot: Where nerds gather to pool their ignorance