Robert Lewko wrote:
On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 3:26 PM, Juan Alberto Cirez <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Let me be the devil's advocate and say that while I welcome
Microsoft acknowledgment that OSS is worthy of concern for their
bottom line; I will also recognize Microsoft role in making what OSS
(and GNU/Linux specifically) is today. Had it not been for Microsoft
(and IBM) we may not have had the PCs and Open Source Software.
Before I say anything else, I started my degree in the 1980's and have
been watching the tech world since DEC had the Dec-20 as their main
system. When I started being interested in personal computers the
SWTP-80, the NorthStar and the Altair 8080 were what to get. I actually
programmed a Honeywell DPS-6000 (one of the first systems that hosted
the PCC, the portable C Compiler). I watched as UNIX made its mark on
history. The first UNIX I had my hands on was System III on a AT&T 3B5.
Juan, just as in the last thread that you started, you have just made a
sweeping assertion that you have not backed with any argument to support
that assertion. I'm not saying that you are wrong, just that the
statement is unsupported.
Again, I don't want to start a flame war, but I see it differently. Way
back before the the internet was commercialized there was USENET that
was mostly a loosely connected web of computers that used modems and
the phone system to spread information. One thing programmers did with
USENET was to share code that was usually packaged into uuencoded tar
files. This was back in the 1980's.
Above I mentioned the Portable C Compiler. That tarball was available
from USENET from the inception of UNIX. That was the original C
compiler that UNIX was compiled with on a new machine.
This even before the GPL and Richard Stallman. Most of the packages
were available for anyone to modify the code or use it as they pleased.
It was understood that you were to share any modifications back to the
community.
It is in this spirit that Torvalds sent his historic message out in
1991, saying here's his little project, it probably won't amount to
much. If you like it and fix any bugs then he wants to be the clearing
house for modifications etc.
Immediately Linux grew wildly. I was in the University of Lethbridge at
the time and the first time I booted Linux was in a University lab on a
PC in 1992! At the time in that lab I saw all my classmates just
overjoyed at what they were looking at (at a University that small the
number of CS grads numbered around 15, everybody knew everybody in
CS!). I heard at least 3 say they were going to try it out at home and
see what they could do with it.
In the intervening years I have seen project after project attempt to
fill in for what is missing to make Linux a viable day to day platform
for general computing. What I see happening is that people see what is
missing and see what they can do to fill the missing parts. That
happened to word processors. That happened to Desktop Environments,
also with browsesrs and with many other application areas.
Linux had another advantage. The person managing it stated that the way
to get modifications accepted was through meritocracy. It is largely
through his deft management of contributions that we are have this
thread about Linux rather than one of the BSD's. Licencing it under the
GPL also had a part in that.
That is how Linux grew and that is what I have seen. It would have
happened regardless of which other systems were popular simply because
people want a free (as in speech) OS that they can rely on. It is
really the fulfillment of Richard Stallman's visions that came out of
the community of generous coders that were on USENET years ago!
BTW! That is how you support a statement.
And an incredibly supported statement it is. I wish other's would take
the same time.
I don't think MS had ANYTHING to do with the growth on Linux & OSS.
Yes, when you are competing against the big boy on the block, you will
try & imitate some of his moves. But the only reason MS has any any
measure of success is unfair business practises, purchasing superior
packages & bundling them as their own...only to later mutate them into
disfunctional blobs & eventually retiring them.
If anything MS has Apple, Xerox & others to thank for their success. As
much as I dislike Apple sometimes I will say that they have provided
much innovation in the tech world...even to the point of inventing
markets & have created standards for other to strive for. Linux has
done this as well & the only way MS can "Create/innovate/improve"
anything is to copy or outright steal from the competition.
MS is nothing more than a D grade teacher trying to compete with with
4.0 GPA's while trying to pas sthem selves off as Harvard Valedictorians.
<<SIGH>> Rant over now.... :-)
_______________________________________________
clug-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php)
**Please remove these lines when replying
