Article:		Vanishing Features of the 2.6 Kernel
Subject:		Re: Congratulations
Date:		2002-12-29 21:39:32
From:		anonymous2
You know, it's *not* like Linux is about strengthening computing alternatives. It is about power, just like Microsoft is. Linux would be in the position to deal a severe blow to MS operating system monopoly by providing drivers for *all* alternative operating systems. But they don't, they rather provide drivers for themselves only so the world may benefit from *their* view on things. (Now what if you don't like *either* Linux or Windows, like me?) And it's not like they aren't *aware* of the alternatives. If you don't know what I am talking about, check http://www.projectudi.org and http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/udi.html . Wake up. RMS isn't the messias, and the GPL is not the bible. Stupid power games like that are exactly what hinders people from chosing their operating system by merits instead of driver availability.

Showing messages 1 through 2 of 2.

• Re: Congratulations
  2003-04-22 11:20:50  anonymous2 [View]
  
  
  Please continue to research Linux end do so with an open mind. You seem to believe that Linux is a single entity whose primary role should be to strike blows at Microsoft; though I must admit that I might like to see an entity that had this mission, It is ignorant to believe that this is the job of a company called 'Linux.' Simalarly, 'Linux' doesn't dictate what developers must write. Developers work (often independently) to write what is needed to get Linux working the way they believe it should and this gets contributed to the common good so someone else doesn't have to reinvent the wheel. When a developer writes a driver for a particular piece of hardware under Linux, there is no law stating that he must also write an equivalent driver under every other non-MS OS; who's to say that this developer even knows how to write the driver for another OS. Should developers write drivers for Linux only if they know how to, and plan to write the equivalent for every other OS?
  
  Anyway, it is obvious that you are already in the primary stages of looking at Linux but you are doing so with tinted glasses. I hope that this doesn't prevent you from finally discovering what Linux actually is. I think you will be impressed once you see more clearly.
  
  -Frd

• Re: Congratulations
  2003-01-22 17:36:29  anonymous2 [View]
  
  
  "Linux would be in the position to deal a severe blow to MS operating system monopoly by providing drivers for *all* alternative operating systems. But they don't, they rather provide drivers for themselves only so the world may benefit from *their* view on things. (Now what if you don't like *either* Linux or Windows, like me?)"
  
  The Linux drivers are open source, meaning if you want to use them on another system then you can simply port them - provided you have the documentation to that system. This not only makes it good for Linux users, but also for those of us writing other operating systems (just one example: http://sourceforge.net/projects/theosproject/) that can use the driver information to later develop their own drivers. GPL is good for kernels.
  
  As others have said, understand GPL, BSD, and other licenses before commenting on this. The licenses are complex, and GPL is one of the simplest and most straight-forward of them all.
  
  And just to note: Linus Torvalds has specifically stated that the binary modules can be loaded. (ask him) The fact that he himself said this bypasses the issue for the Linux Kernel.
  
  In any case, read the licenses.