Is Linus Torvalds Speaking for Linux Anymore?

An anonymous reader writes to tell us CNET is currently running a story asking 'Is Linus Torvalds even speaking for Linux anymore?' It examines both Torvalds' recent public statements on other operating systems and his current approach towards Linux. The author wonders if his utopian view of how an operating system should be viewed and used is just too alien from what the majority of users are really looking for. "if it were up to Torvalds, beauty and intuition would take a backseat to functionality. But when you look at distributions like Ubuntu or OpenSuse, it looks like no one is paying attention. 'An OS should never have been something that people (in general) really care about: it should be completely invisible and nobody should give a flying [expletive] about it except the technical people.' Sure, that statement makes some sense, but in the grand scheme of things, it's the design and usability factor that makes the operating system much easier to use. And while both Mac OS X and Windows have their issues, for the average person, it makes more sense to use those than Linux."

Comments

Re:FUD alert

[palegray.net]

That's what he's been doing for the last decade. Giving a few talks here and there doesn't mean 99% of his time isn't still devoted to the kernel.

It's Okay

[cryptoz]

Welcome to the internet. You can swear here.

Re:Torvalds Speaks for Linux(TM)

[Doc Ruby]

Linux is not "THE OS". It's the kernel. Without the rest of, say, GNU's apps that come in, say, Ubuntu, it's not an OS, just a kernel. Which isn't enough for apps to run on - except those few that don't need an OS.

Different distros can qualify as different OS'es if they're so incompatible that apps aren't compatible among them. Not just installation packages like .deb or .rpm, but the actual apps which depend on different distro features, whether that's different directory structure, different other bundled apps (like, say, ps), or other APIs that differ and break app compatibility.

Sure, journalists and users will use the terms wrong. But what counts is what works, regardless of what anyone says. Ubuntu, for example, is more than an OS, because it includes other content, like for example, Firefox plugins, that apps don't depend on, but which enhance apps. It's really a "user environment", which includes kernel, OS, apps, Desktop, content, and other material that people use when they get Ubuntu.

And Linus is empowered to speak for only the kernel among all of those. Since Linus doesn't try to hold everything depending on his kernel hostage, he doesn't speak for anything more, even though he possibly could if he were a powermad jerk. Which he's not. If he were to try, someone would fork the kernel, even if they couldn't call it "Linux" anymore (though others certainly could, mistakenly). And with so many Linux distro brands already established, that wouldn't really cripple the "Linux" industry.