Slashdot Mirror
Second "Bonus" Interview: Jon "maddog" Hall
As head of Linux International, Jon Hall is one of the highest-profile people in the Linux community. He's also one of the nicest. He's wanted to do this interview for a long time, and we've wanted to have him as a guest for just as long. Finally we got the schedules to match. Yay! Suggested interview theme: "The next 100 years of Linux," but what you actually ask is up to you. One note to clear up a name misunderstanding that has been causing problems for Jon "maddog" Hall lately: Please do not confuse him with VA Linux Vice Presedent (and recent "on paper" mega-millionaire) John T. Hall. (Note the spelling difference!) They are not, repeat not, the same person! Anyway, usual interview rules - with one difference: we're going to post Jon's answers Saturday instead of Friday. Who could be better (and what topic could be better) to kick off the New Year?
There have been lots of articles on what is the future of the current Linux projects... What do you see as the NEW, non-current directions that Linux will embark on in the near future/next century?
Do you think GNU/HURD might one day take over Linux's place? It certainly has a more modern design, although it is currently still in the works. Do you think it's a plausible alternative to Linux when it is ready for general consumption?
Or does Linux have a drive in the Open Source community that HURD doesn't? Linux seems to have generated a lot of enthusiasm, fandom, (and zealotry?). Could it be this drive that made Linux so successful and the lack thereof make HURD take such a long time to get developed?
(Disclaimer: I am NOT trying to start a flamewar between Linux and HURD supporters.)
mikre he sophia he tou Mikrosophou.
Is it inevitable that Linux one day become obselete and cosequently be superceded by the Next Great OS? The obvious answer to this question is yes: all things must eventually come to an end and computing is not a field where any one technique can retain supremacy in the face of continual technical improvement. The equally obvious reply is that the methodology process used in Linux and other open-source operating systems such as *BSD and Hurd represent a new paradigm in software developement that self-perpetuates itself and adapts to new advances by incorporating them into its own infrastructure while creating new innovation. What view do you subscribe to?
Could you explain your rational for moving from the Tru64 UNIX group at Compaq to VA Linux? Was it a financial decision? Do you like Linux technology better? Was it ideological (Open Source)? Do you just like the location better? Was it just for a change? Etc.
What ever happened to get the nick name "maddog"?
Must have a pretty interesting story behind that, eh?
...are being touted as the next great evolution of the internet and computing in general. As ASPs are becoming more sophisticated, both home and business boxen will supposedly become little more than an embedded web client. It seems mod_perl on Linux is perfect for the server and Mozilla on Linux will be perfect as the client. If this is in the near future how can/should Linux improve its utilities for this segment of the internet?
There's a spider on your shoulder.
Linux, and in general the Open Source development model, has been accused in the past of "chasing the taillights" -- of always catching up to features that other commercial programs have, because they are results of vision rather than of a creeping evolution.
Myself, I think there may be something in this view, when I look e.g. at the emerging UI input methods like voice recognition and pen input/handwriting recognition on the client side, and various goodies on the server side.
Do you agree with this? If so, is Linux condemned to always be a few steps behind of the current state of the art of OS design, at least as far as features go?
If not, what examples of vision and features unique to Linux would you provide as examples?
How can Linux be brought into the mainstream when it's still not as easy to install as Windows? This may seem like a moot point to the readers of Slashdot, but at the same time, Slashdot is hardly a representative cross-section of (an) America (lacking the tech know-how / desire to work with a complex OS)?
regarding the recent community linux certification efforts etc, can we expect to see LI take a part in this ? Are we going to get free community certification for Linux ? Especially since all PHB's now seem to want certification...
As I mentioned in a recent article thread, the Linux kernel is braving new waters in several areas which UNIX has traditionally shunned in the kernel (graphics support, http server, game support for network management, etc). These features raise the eyebrows of many people, but is this the way you see operating system design moving in the future? Are we so bound by the dreaded user-mode context switch that we have to plow every service as deep into the kernel as it will go?
Mind you, I'm all for the khttpd idea as a single example, but it seems like the beginning of a trend that will end up making the original Linux kernel look like a wristwatch driver, and leave a lot of low-end users in a bind....
Thoughts?
I don't understand how Linux can complete in the upper end server market, especially against competitors like Microsoft and Sun.
Microsoft is about to release Windows 2000 datacenter which will allow up to 64gig of ram and 32 processors. How can any one company afford that kind of equipment for the development of Linux?
Do you have any plans to recruit companies like Compaq and Dell so that they are major players in the development efforts of Linux? It seems to me that it would be benificial to have companies like this helping to direct the future development of Linux in terms of large scale applications. I realize that these companies are developing drivers and the such, but that isn't really what I'm talking about..
Apache running on Linux on a machine with 32 processors and 64gig of ram, able to out perform anything MS can throw at it. That is what I'm talking about...
Do you think it's wise having Linux ported for pretty much every architecture ever made? It may be fun and a source of pride to have an OS that can run everything, but is it really sensible to spend time and resources porting Linux to lets say S/390, when we pretty much know for sure that OS/390 will run that hardware better?
Is Linux's popularity a threat to other open OS projects? Even now, it seems all other free (and even non-free, I guess) unices will want to have binary compatibility with Linux. And as more and more users just use binary software distributions, there will probably soon be no reason for anybody to actually create BSD, Hurd or whatnot binaries. Except that Hurd doesn't run Linux binaries at the moment... right :)
Linux has been made to run on top of a microkernel and one of Hurd's frequently asked questions seems to be if Hurd could be run using Linux as microkernel. The answer doesn't actually say it couldn't.
What about the EROS operating system? I read once about it in Slashdot and on holidays I've spent some time reading its documentation. Seems very interesting, the whole capability system concept, no traditional filesystems, persistence and all. Yeah, they seem to be designing a Linux environment hosted under Eros or something like that.
But what if Linux people just somehow weave the capability model and persistence into the Linux kernel? What will that do to EROS? Is Linux so popular, that people would blindly use it also for tasks for which it doesn't suite at all?
As a GPL-protected project, Linux can never become a new Windows, but could it become a threat to natural diversity in the open source world?
NOSPAM@REMOVETHIS.NO.SPAM - you'll find the real address somewhere
How about the software no one wants to write?
By this, I mean the software that most programmers would consider "boring", yet is truly essential to the further growth of Linux as a desktop and server OS. It's great that we have so many window managers, office suites, browsers, etc. both existing and coming down the pike, but what about the other stuff that's just not as exciting? The stuff you really have to pay people to write? Maybe third party vendors with paid employees are the answer, but will all of those companies want to make their software truly Open Source?
----------------
"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein
Co-founder and designer at Music Nearby: http://musicnearby.com
I have had the chance to meet you at several LinuxWorldExpo's and USENIX etc.. At each of these events, you were always present at the parties with a large glass of beer.
My question:
What is your favorite beer? and why?
--Mike
I stumbled across an interesting story about a
recent adventure you had in India. (Sorry I lost the link - it had something to do with a fudster who didn't like logging onto his home machine.)
Based on your experiences in India and other parts of the non-West, what do you think needs to be stressed, advocacy-wise to make Linux more acceptable outside America and Europe ?