This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new!


Posted by: Anonymous Coward on April 17, 2002 09:06 PM
Maybe what YOU don't get is that most Linux people aren't out to "win at all costs"...

They aren't??? Then why all of the MS trash talking in EVERY forum imaginable? I'm all for alternatives but Linux, right now, IS NOT an alternative on the normal user's desktop. Some Linux users like it that way. That's fine. But don't trash MS for having a crappy O.S. unless you have something better to offer. If you do have something better to offer, then by all means, put it out there. But don't be suprised when users want to be able to do certain things that are taboo to Linux users. Removing the dependance on command line driven software is one item that will help expand Linux onto the desktops that it covets, but , "YOU CAN"T DO THAT!!! It will create this security hole and remove this functionality, etc". New users LOATHE the command line interface!!! It is a simple FACT! Get used to it!

If Linux ended up beating Windows but ending up BEING Windows (closed source, unstable, security-exploit prone), then where exactly is the benefit?

I agree but the Linux community cannot have it both ways. You either have a system that is so secure that only geeks can use it or you open it up a bit and let your grandmother work with it! If someone in the GPL community can find a way to do both, it would be a great accomplishment. I don't believe that the OpenSource community would allow the main Linux desktop O.S. (whatever that proves to be) to remain "closed source" for long. Just look at what happened to Lindows. They release a "not-really-a beta" version of their stuff without the source and we saw the uprising that happened because of that.

The arguement of "cut him some slack, he's the best chance to beat Microsoft" is both specious and uninteresting.

I'm not saying do nothing. I'm saying that if the Linux community is going to closely watch every major piece of GPL software to make sure that they are following "the rules", what makes them different from MS or the gov't? At least MS has an argument for this! You have to pay for Windows, so they should watch their assets closely. However, Lindows is only available to a select few... as a beta... for a trial period! And you folks are on them like vultures on a carcass. "Where's the source... where's the source?". Why does the Linux community want it so bad? I'll tell you why, and the makers of Lindows know this too. If they did release the source earlier, then someone would have beat them to their own release! That's right! Someone would have made another distro that mimics Lindows just because it is allowed in the Linux world. What a pathetic existance. If I were the Lindows CEO, I would tell the whole GPL community to kiss my ass for treating me like that! I would have closed as much of the source as I could and GPL released the source that I couldn't (which is already out there). I would then turn my back completely on the OpenSource community for being a bunch of "Brutus" clones (William Shakespeare, Julius Caeser).


Return to FSF asks Lindows, "Where's the source?"