What is Linux becoming?

[golinux]

tomazzi . . . did you even read that first post? It was a comment expressing my disappointment about the Linux Foundation's free edX course - Introduction to Linux - that was offered last fall. In that context the use of 'Linux' is appropriate IMO because that's how the LF billed the course. In light of the systemd debacle, the course appears to be a prelude to the new OneLinux world that Red Hat envisions. They'll need lots of new sysadmins to man those support desks . . . kachink, kachink . . .

That being said . . . your comments are well-taken.

[schnuller]

First of all, the title of this topic is entirely inappropriate: It should be something like: "What is Debian and some other GNU/Linux distros becoming?"

I do understand why many people are calling GNU/Linux as just Linux - this is a shortcut, simplification, which is just easier to pronounce.

However, most of newbies and trolls do not understand where the GNU part is coming from, so I think that it should be (again) clarified in this topic.

GNU is the Operating System which we are all using. This project was settled long before Linux kernel have even started to exist. Although Linus is so proud of his work, and he's making selfish claims about how he and his work is important today, the truth is, that his kernel was a piece of crap in the beginning, and the only reason why it is used so widely today, is that it have been choosen by GNU developers as a default kernel.

Thanks to that, thousants of developers and enthusiasts have started to improve and develop that crappy kernel, and only thanks to that Linux is now what it is ( the most successful software in the world, but not thanks to Linus Torvalds )

So, if someone is negatively speaking of "gnuism" in regard to GNU project, which have settled the rules and is backing the free/open sotware world with a lawyers support, GPL and lots of great software (like gcc, ssh, binutils, etc), then for me he's just an uneducated moron, or just a troll.

Just don't forget about GNU, when You say Linux

Another thing is, that Linux is not becoming anythig else than it already is: it's just GNU/Linux distros, infiltrated by former an present RedHat employes, who are trying hard to make the world dependant on RedHat. They are just getting paid for doing this - at least this looks like the most probable reason...

Regards.

All is right and well said. Imho.
The problem for me: Where are the users who care for such? It is a minority (so small, not even worth calling it a minority).

It really is time for a GNU operating system with a GNU kernel (which, if i understand correct, would be the Hurd and i think more precise Mach). For those people who do care.

Ubuntu and Mint did a good job ... in making Linux what it is today. Linux not as an operating system, but as a social ecosystem.

[twoflowers]

Probably that's the problem of Linux: The people we ran from in the Windows world have finally arrived in Linuxland, wearing their hawaii shirts and tastless habits.

[pendrachken]

Whenever i use Windows i either take a pirated version or just use the official one for 3 months. I don't even bother to install antiVirus, and never had no problems. XP wasn't unstable for me neither.

At lest few things should be explained here:
1. Congratulations: publicly available, pirated copies of winblows are not *free* - they are just including or are prepared for troyans. And You, because of believing in a second-hand or "mastered" versions of winblows are just a naive victim - again: congratulations... (windows MX f.e. is a great example of how to blow up users' arse)
2. Windows is relatively stable as long, as You don't try to install programs on it .... that will kill its performance, becausae it's not prepared to launch any programs but also due to a to a simple fact:
Every single program for winblows contains malware, add-ons for your browser, antivirus software (usually that utter crap called McAffee) and yet more crap.

So, congratulations - You have found Your favourite OS - I have to spend a lot more time to have one ...

PS.

I like the look and feel of Win7 way more than any environment i know when using Linux, btw.

Did You know that pre-SP1 win7 have used win95/98 icons for hardware manager? whoa...

Congrats! You single handedly displayed the very thing that keeps many companies from using / adding to / donating source code to the FOSS community.
Your rambling vitriol filled rants that have absolutely no idea what you are talking about paint the OSS community in almost as bad a light as bigots and radical feminists do their respective causes. Using poor grammar, mocking nomenclature for names, and generally ranting about things you know absolutely nothing about does not help the FOSS community in any way shape or form.


As for your little GNU rant, I can port the BSD userland to Linux calls and compile it with CLANG; GNU is a convenience, not a necessity. HURD never took off because the Linux kernel has a better architecture and thus many more supporters, if you truly want HURD to take off I would recommend ditching Linux and running HURD while contributing code to bring it out of the 90's.
Admittedly I haven't looked at HURD in a long time, but I seem to remember something from a year or so ago that it FINALLY got USB ( or some other stupid common thing that Win95OSR2 had ) and was 32bit only. It's going to take a whole lot of work to get up to speed, and there is no reason to work on it since Linux already works quite well, even RMS has pretty much given up on it.

[schnuller]

I fail to see the relation between what you quoted and what you posted.
It seem to be completely different subjects (the quote is about Windows, you seem to speak about FOSS or Linux).

What keeps companies from using it? I don't know. One reason might be the endless change. In a very short time i had to relearn: the bootloader, kde, gnome, the init system, firefox all the time, and quite some other stuff i forgot.
But in the end it is their problem, not mine. And not yours.

[pendrachken]

I fail to see the relation between what you quoted and what you posted.
It seem to be completely different subjects (the quote is about Windows, you seem to speak about FOSS or Linux).

What keeps companies from using it? I don't know. One reason might be the endless change. In a very short time i had to relearn: the bootloader, kde, gnome, the init system, firefox all the time, and quite some other stuff i forgot.
But in the end it is their problem, not mine. And not yours.

Then perhaps you should go back and re-read what was quoted, I.E. all the vitriolic and just plain wrong drivel that tomazzi posted when quoting you.

You might also note I never said use, I said contribute. Those are some of the main reasons that companies don't contribute to OSS as a general rule, the community "sucks" due to only major poles being vocal,and mostly the rabid everything must be free pole spouting off lunacy like tomazzi, with not enough vocal moderate voices chiming in.

I mean really, what company wants to be seen being related to a project that had a company release, both for free and against a fast moving target for over a decade, drivers for hardware going back years longer than its competitor and then get publicly flipped off and and told "fu.ck you" all because they quite literally CAN'T opensource the driver? Because I'm sure NVidia wouldn't absolutely LOVE to not have to devote manpower to developing some of the best Linux gfx drivers, they would hate to save all that money...
I can' tell you right now that Linus looked the fool, and all of these zealots - especially the ones who just insult the opposing view - all look like fools. I sure wouldn't want MY company to be associated with people that act like that, image is everything when selling products unless you have a monopoly.

[schnuller]

Well: but you didn't quote that ...
Anyway:
I misunderstood (not fully though). You said contribute.
As far i know quite some companies *do* contribute, and a lot (IBM, google, etc).

As far linux forums are concerned: Most look like a big mess. If i would ran into one of them today, and wouldn't know/use Linux yet, i sure would decide to never ever look at it again (I can say for sure that the same is valid for facebook groups. And both is what new users run into first of all, as far i can tell).
During a short window in time i ran into a forum which helped me to get the main ideas sorted. For that i am grateful, but it was pure coincidence (if i would have ran into rickh back then .... ).

I still think that the constant change in the FOSS world is quite a problem. Peopel are busy all the time to get used to those changes (for things which did work), and not everyone likes that (XP was pretty much the same for how long? 14 years?).

-
I see your point, of course. I didn't say i disagree. I only did a bit of chat.

[Flemur]

schnuller: I like the look and feel of Win7 way more than any environment i know when using Linux, btw.

I disliked it enough to replace it with blackbox.

tomazzi: Every single program for winblows contains malware, add-ons for your browser, antivirus software (usually that utter crap called McAffee) and yet more crap.

False.

tomazzi: Ok, I've oversized the problem a bit. Definitely, it was not entirely true that *every single program* contains malware. Perhaps, I should say that "every single commercial software" contains malware...

Still false.

old_croc: X window managers - if you had one - were primitive and not easy to get going. Strangely enough one early X window manager, Motif, was neither open source not free: a licence cost about $150.

We used Motif for the GUI widgets, with the X window mgr; IIRC Motif cost > $2K (not accounting for inflation).

old_croc: You can do sound, video or photo editing, write your own music, do book publishing or web design, play games or whatever, all with GNU open source software that's as good as, if not better than, commercial alternatives.

I hate it when people write "wow, just wow", but that applies here. Linux sound/imaging/video apps are its worst feature; they really suck compared to windows (3rd party, including free) apps, unless your desired result is tossing keyboard thru monitor. If not for wine and (maybe) virtualbox, I'd put up with windows just to use the available apps.

[mean_dean]

Linux sound/imaging/video apps are its worst feature; they really suck compared to windows (3rd party, including free) apps, unless your desired result is tossing keyboard thru monitor.

Oddly enough when I use windows I use the same apps as I do on linux. I guess maybe I am just use to really suck apps and they seem to suffice even on windows.

[schnuller]

Linux sound/imaging/video apps are its worst feature; they really suck compared to windows (3rd party, including free) apps, unless your desired result is tossing keyboard thru monitor.

Oddly enough when I use windows I use the same apps as I do on linux.

Me too. That was one of my points.
I have to admit that it's a couple of months, if not more, that i looked at Windows.

@Flemur: I think blackbox for Windows is called bblean. Can't say it is outstanding sexy.