0

Linus has spoken so get back to work and stop burning up the Internet with your hate speeches and endless ramblings about Microsoft and how this is so wrong. Linus accepted the code and gives his reasons as to why. Here's my take on the whole thing with responses to an interview with Linus done by Linux Magazine.
Quotes from Linus are in green text.

“Oh, I’m a big believer in “technology over politics”. I don’t care who it comes from, as long as there are solid reasons for the code, and as long as we don’t have to worry about licensing etc issues.

Thank goodness he's made this clear to everyone. Thanks, Linus. It's time someone like you said "technology over politics."

So complaining about the fact that Microsoft picked a selfish area to work on is just silly. Of course they picked an area that helps them. That’s the point of open source - the ability to make the code better for your particular needs, whoever the ‘your’ in question happens to be.

Exactly. I think people forget that the operative term "open" refers to anyone, even Microsoft. They know people are going to run Linux. They've given up on the idea of an all Microsoft world and are trying to accommodate those who wish to run Linux on Microsoft products like Hyper-V.

I may make jokes about Microsoft at times, but at the same time, I think the Microsoft hatred is a disease. I believe in open development, and that very much involves not just making the source open, but also not shutting other people and companies out.

As a friend of mine once said to me, after a long and beer-soaked rant about Microsoft and their desires to take over the world, "Dude, Microsoft bashing is so 2004."

There are ‘extremists’ in the free software world, but that’s one major reason why I don’t call what I do ‘free software’ any more. I don’t want to be associated with the people for whom it’s about exclusion and hatred.”

Really? Really, Linus? There are extremists in the free software world? Zealots? Wow, I really hadn't noticed any. You must be in some theoretical kingdom none of us know about. Perhaps you're just paranoid.

So, whatever your personal take on Microsoft's code offering, you have to defer to Linus' opinion here. He, after all, is the man. If he had been hesitant to include the code, then one could complain a bit but he wasn't. In fact, here is a direct quote from him about allowing the code's inclusion about the source of said code:

In fact, to some degree, I’d be more likely to include it because it’s from a new member of the community rather than less (again, I’d like to point out that drivers are special. They don’t impact other things, so they get merged much more easily than some core changes).

Now, will there be more hatred tossed in Microsoft's direction in the future? Sure there will. Will Linus' opinion become less significant over time in these matters? Who knows, but until then, he is the final word on the Linux kernel.

What do you think? Do you think he's rolled over on the He Man Microsoft-Haters Club or do you think he's right? Write back and let me know.

3
Contributors
5
Replies
7
Views
8 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by cmccullough
0

Linus has made clear in the past that he is more concerned with technology than "politics". And while I hold him in the highest regard as the guiding force on technical issues, others like Richard Stallman have more credibility when it come to the ethical principles involved in guiding the FOSS movement.
This may be the right decision at this time on this particular question, but I would always be wary of Microsoft. They have proven over and over that they are greedy, unethical monopolists.
http://linuxlatitude.blogspot.com/2008/05/no-microsoft.html

0

Stallman? A paragon of credibility? I don't know, maybe he is but he's also a certifiable whacko.
As we might say in the Great State of Texas, "He's crazier'n a peach orchard boar."

0

Yes, Stallman may be eccentric, but at least he has principles and sticks to them. He is looking out for the user, whereas Microsoft is only out for themselves, at the expense of everyone else.
I prefer a middle ground somewhere between Linus and RMS usually, though sometimes you just can't compromise your principles. Microsoft's history speaks for itself.

0

Okay. I use Gnu/Linux and only Gnu/Linux (well, FreeBSD, too) and there's a reason for this. I don't like Microsoft and their shady, more like criminal, business practices. I DO NOT want code from Microsoft in the kernel that runs my OS. If Linus inputs code from MS into the kernel, then I'll be moving onto FreeBSD (or one of the other BSD's). Microsoft is not giving this code out of the kindness of their hearts. They have a reason and I'm sure it's not to help out the open source community. And khess, you may think that Stallman is a wacko, but he sticks to what he believes and will never alter that stance. I can guarantee there is nothing you can say to change that. He cares about the user and could care less about corporations.

Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.