Yawn
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| pat Mar 24, 2006 5:05 AM EDT |
Another Microsft story, yawn. Who wants to use an OS that struggles under when the CPU goes above 1%? Who wants to use an OS that requires top of the line hardware to achieve minimal performance? Who wants to use an OS that requires you to enumerate every potential version of evil code every invented for the convenience of flashy features? Who wants to use an OS that you can't even own? That is why I say thank you Linus Torvalds, thank you for inventing Linux. |
| richo123 Mar 24, 2006 5:31 AM EDT |
Theory of evolution: The light nimble Linux "mammal" will displace the inflexible lumbering "dinosaur" MS. |
| Libervis Mar 24, 2006 12:11 PM EDT |
Pat, just a "little" correction.. :)Quoting:That is why I say thank you Linus Torvalds, thank you for inventing Linux. While Linus Torvalds definitely deserves part of the credit, he is not the only one responsible for creating the operating system you are talking about: GNU/Linux. GNU project (http://www.gnu.org) was the project of developing a free (as in freedom) operating system, and it was almost finished missing just one final part; the kernel. Linus Torvalds provided that part and the system essentially became GNU/Linux. Linux kernel cannot work without GNU software while GNU software cannot work on its own either, but the combination, as we all know, is golden. ;) Cheers Daniel |
| cjcox Mar 24, 2006 12:22 PM EDT |
Yes.. GNU is needed for a mostly functional Linux, but there a plethora of licenses out there... for example, there's quite a bit that is also needed that came from the BSD system (of course, BSD licensed software is easily absorbed into a GPL version). The idea that is GNU/Linux is just as flawed now as just saying Linux. (if you use the FSF arguments for GNU/Linux) |
| Libervis Mar 24, 2006 3:23 PM EDT |
Quoting:The idea that is GNU/Linux is just as flawed now as just saying Linux. (if you use the FSF arguments for GNU/Linux) That may even be true if you leave out the fact that GNU GPL played and still plays a major role in GNU/Linux success. Whatever BSD licensed code is in there, GPL still covers a big majority of it. GPL is the legal embodiment of the Free Software philosophy through which GNU/Linux developed and without which I doubt it would be of any real significance. The development model that GPL enables is again the practical consequence of that Free Software philosophy. So it's not necessarily just about the code, it is also about the license, but also about association with the name that leads to the original cause for which this operating system was started (and for which the license was again developed), which is freedom. That's the argument presented by Richard Stallman who as its president represents the FSF, so that is essentially the FSF argument, and I believe is valid. Thanks |
| cjcox Mar 24, 2006 9:27 PM EDT |
GPL != GNU Even RMS will tell you that. Go ask him yourself. |
| pat Mar 25, 2006 4:42 AM EDT |
Linus provided the spark. Without him we would still be waiting on hurd....oh wait we still are. |
| tadelste Mar 25, 2006 6:29 AM EDT |
In the esoteric domains of executive management you would get a kick out of the kinds of discussions that take place. Much of it one might call secular humanism. Others might call it new thought or human potential. In nearly all of those discussions people refer to "cause points". An acknowledge exists for the originator of action. So, someone may have thought of it, but whoever put the action into motion would get the classification of the cause point. I find the subject of Linux interesting. Free Software has a cause point named Richard Stallman. The kernel has a cause point named Linux. For my purposes, I say that RMS orchestrated userland and Linus orchestrated the kernel. I don't know where the paths crossover, but generally, I would say that the buck stops at Linus and RMS. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!