Re: Would Linux Be Better Off Without the Zealots and Ideologues?

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Tony Neville, Mar 24, 2010.

  1. Tony Neville

    Tony Neville Guest

    You're not only talking about an already tiny proportion of computer users,
    but a tiny proportion of computer users that are generally ignored ~except~
    by people like you who seem to derive some amount of pleasure toying with
    them. All fun and games, I suppose. In any case, I'd say Linux usage
    would be about where it is now with or without its zealots.

    Tony.
    Tony Neville, Mar 24, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Tony Neville

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 23:04:31 +1300, Tony Neville wrote:

    > You're not only talking about an already tiny proportion of computer
    > users, but a tiny proportion of computer users that are generally
    > ignored ~except~ by people like you who seem to derive some amount of
    > pleasure toying with them. All fun and games, I suppose. In any
    > case, I'd say Linux usage would be about where it is now with or
    > without its zealots.
    >
    > Tony.


    Everyone who uses the Internet uses Open Source software (Bind). Most websites are hosted on Open
    Source Software (Apache). A significant percentage of the population uses Open Source browsers or
    office productivity software.

    Also, a significant percentage of Enterprise users use Squid (often on FreeBSD) and a significant
    percentage of Enterprise users use Oracle databases hosted on Linux.

    Linux on the Desktop is difficult to estimate due to easy availability of downloaded versions that people
    can simply install and don't have to register, and the fact that proxys don't all report the true OS of the
    systems that connect through them.

    Whatever "Impossible's" view is on the matter Linux on the desktop meets all my personal requirements
    and I find it to be stable, reliable. In addition, I have choices available to me that Microsoft Windows
    simply does not have (in fact won't have). Moreover, many close source applications designed to run
    only under MS Windows also run perfectly under Wine - again making it possible for users to choose.


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Mar 24, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Tony Neville

    peterwn Guest

    On Mar 25, 1:11 am, "impossible" <> wrote:

    > > You're not only talking about an already tiny proportion of computer
    > > users, but a tiny proportion of computer users that are generally ignored
    > > ~except~ by people like you who seem to derive some amount of pleasure
    > > toying with them.   All fun and games, I suppose.    In any case,  I'd say
    > > Linux usage would be about where it is now with or without its zealots.

    >
    > The real issue is licensed zealotry in the form of GPL restrictions that
    > turn off potential users. Linus Torvald cautioned aginst this when GPL3 was
    > issued because he thought the anti-TiVo provisions were unnecessarily
    > coercive.


    Typical Micro$oft FUD. From an end user perspective, the GPL is an
    'eat what you want' licence - you can run GPL'd code to your heart's
    content whether you are a kid in mom's basement or a multi-national
    enterprise. GPL code users have no fear of a FSF 'Goon Squad' coming
    in the door and demanding an audit (which is a risk all Windows users
    face as they agreed to it under the EULA). And all this is to the
    utter delight of those who put in the hard work to create and maintain
    the code. OK, there are requirements placed on developers, but these
    are not really onerous, and would be far less onerous than when
    dealing with proprietary code bases. Google, for example, uses and
    works on GPL'd code in its enterprise without experiencing GPL
    difficulties.

    Granted, the GPL causes massive headaches to proprietary software
    companies such as Microsoft, since to them the alledged 'viral'
    effects of the GPL are very real. They just dare not let GPL code into
    their proprietary code bases. This is precisely what the GPL intended
    to do. This is why there have been talk of attempts in the USA to seek
    court decisions which, if successful, would have the effect of
    convertng the GPL to a 'do anything you like' licence. It won't happen
    because if it did, it would rip the guts right out of copyright law.

    I am not responding to 'Impossible's' response to my earlier posting -
    no need to as it speaks for itself as far as I am concerned.
    peterwn, Mar 24, 2010
    #3
  4. Tony Neville

    peterwn Guest

    On Mar 25, 12:51 pm, "impossible" <> wrote:

    >
    > >> The real issue is licensed zealotry in the form of GPL restrictions that
    > >> turn off potential users. Linus Torvald cautioned aginst this when GPL3
    > >> was
    > >> issued because he thought the anti-TiVo provisions were unnecessarily
    > >> coercive.

    >
    > > Typical Micro$oft FUD.

    >
    > Linus Torvalds led the criticism of GPL3. Is he working for Microsft now?


    Linus is entitled to his own opinion and has complete freedom to
    express it 'urbi et orbi'. He does not speak for the developers of
    software that sits outside the Linux kernel (eg Busybox, GNUcash, Open
    Office, etc). Linus did not agree with GPL V2 and added a 'preamble'
    to it which slightly eased some of the terms. Again, that was his
    right, the same as the right of any deleloper to make available code
    under a modified GPL or to make GPL code or any other of their created
    code available to others under a different licence.

    None of this nor any differences of opinions can be construed as
    reflecting on anyones' integrity or implying that anyone works for
    specific employers.

    Linus is employed by the Linux Foundation, a non profit organisation.
    It has various 'big name' companies as sponsor members, but not
    Microsoft. Linus has made various very astute decisions regarding
    kernel development and has a high level of management and human
    relations skills. This is why the Linux kernel remains is pre-eminent
    today and why 'Hurd' and other kernel efforts have not really taken
    off. Anyone who thinks they can do better is free to embark on their
    own 'fork' of the kernel. IMO this will not be happning any time soon.
    peterwn, Mar 25, 2010
    #4
  5. Tony Neville

    Gordon Guest

    On 2010-03-24, Tony Neville <> wrote:
    > You're not only talking about an already tiny proportion of computer users,
    > but a tiny proportion of computer users that are generally ignored ~except~
    > by people like you who seem to derive some amount of pleasure toying with
    > them. All fun and games, I suppose. In any case, I'd say Linux usage
    > would be about where it is now with or without its zealots.
    >

    Probably, after all MS has its zealots.

    It will settle down after the war is over.
    Gordon, Mar 25, 2010
    #5
  6. Tony Neville

    Tony Neville Guest

    "Sweetpea" <> wrote in message
    news:p...
    > On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 23:04:31 +1300, Tony Neville wrote:
    >
    >> You're not only talking about an already tiny proportion of computer
    >> users, but a tiny proportion of computer users that are generally
    >> ignored ~except~ by people like you who seem to derive some amount of
    >> pleasure toying with them. All fun and games, I suppose. In any
    >> case, I'd say Linux usage would be about where it is now with or
    >> without its zealots.
    >>
    >> Tony.

    >
    > Everyone who uses the Internet uses Open Source software (Bind). Most
    > websites are hosted on Open
    > Source Software (Apache). A significant percentage of the population uses
    > Open Source browsers or
    > office productivity software.
    >
    > Also, a significant percentage of Enterprise users use Squid (often on
    > FreeBSD) and a significant
    > percentage of Enterprise users use Oracle databases hosted on Linux.
    >
    > Linux on the Desktop is difficult to estimate due to easy availability of
    > downloaded versions that people
    > can simply install and don't have to register, and the fact that proxys
    > don't all report the true OS of the
    > systems that connect through them.
    >
    > Whatever "Impossible's" view is on the matter Linux on the desktop meets
    > all my personal requirements
    > and I find it to be stable, reliable. In addition, I have choices
    > available to me that Microsoft Windows
    > simply does not have (in fact won't have). Moreover, many close source
    > applications designed to run
    > only under MS Windows also run perfectly under Wine - again making it
    > possible for users to choose.


    His question wasn't about Linux usage as it stands but whether Linux zealots
    have had any influence over it.

    If you or anyone cares to know my view on the closed source/open source
    debate then I'll sum it up like this: 2 open source programs + 2 closed
    source programs = 4 choices.

    Tony.
    Tony Neville, Mar 25, 2010
    #6
  7. Tony Neville

    victor Guest

    On 25/03/10 16:10, impossible wrote:

    >
    > Yes, I agree with Linus Torvalds. Linux would be better off without the
    > zealots and ideologues.


    He will be SO pleased to hear that !
    victor, Mar 25, 2010
    #7
  8. Tony Neville

    Tony Neville Guest

    "peterwn" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mar 25, 1:11 am, "impossible" <> wrote:
    >
    >> > You're not only talking about an already tiny proportion of computer
    >> > users, but a tiny proportion of computer users that are generally
    >> > ignored
    >> > ~except~ by people like you who seem to derive some amount of pleasure
    >> > toying with them. All fun and games, I suppose. In any case, I'd
    >> > say
    >> > Linux usage would be about where it is now with or without its zealots.

    >>
    >> The real issue is licensed zealotry in the form of GPL restrictions that
    >> turn off potential users. Linus Torvald cautioned aginst this when GPL3
    >> was
    >> issued because he thought the anti-TiVo provisions were unnecessarily
    >> coercive.

    >
    > Typical Micro$oft FUD. From an end user perspective, the GPL is an
    > 'eat what you want' licence - you can run GPL'd code to your heart's
    > content whether you are a kid in mom's basement or a multi-national
    > enterprise. GPL code users have no fear of a FSF 'Goon Squad' coming
    > in the door and demanding an audit (which is a risk all Windows users
    > face as they agreed to it under the EULA). And all this is to the


    Oh, yes please, Mistress! What is the minimum I would have to do in order
    to get this 'Goon Squad' banging on my door?

    Tony.
    Tony Neville, Mar 25, 2010
    #8
  9. Tony Neville

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:49:17 -0700, peterwn wrote:

    > Granted, the GPL causes massive headaches to proprietary software
    > companies such as Microsoft, since to them the alledged 'viral' effects
    > of the GPL are very real. They just dare not let GPL code into their
    > proprietary code bases. This is precisely what the GPL intended to do.


    Yup - and is one of the fundamental protections of Free software - keeping the source code always
    available for everyone to do what they like with it.


    > This is why there have been talk of attempts in the USA to seek court
    > decisions which, if successful, would have the effect of convertng the
    > GPL to a 'do anything you like' licence. It won't happen because if it
    > did, it would rip the guts right out of copyright law.


    Yup agreed. Those persons merely show their utter ignorance of copyright law and their utter contempt
    for the people who wrote the software and released it under the GPL!


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Mar 25, 2010
    #9
  10. Tony Neville

    Sweetpea Guest

    On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 21:40:49 +1300, Tony Neville wrote:

    > "peterwn" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> On Mar 25, 1:11 am, "impossible" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>> > You're not only talking about an already tiny proportion of computer
    >>> > users, but a tiny proportion of computer users that are generally
    >>> > ignored
    >>> > ~except~ by people like you who seem to derive some amount of
    >>> > pleasure toying with them. All fun and games, I suppose. In any
    >>> > case, I'd say
    >>> > Linux usage would be about where it is now with or without its
    >>> > zealots.
    >>>
    >>> The real issue is licensed zealotry in the form of GPL restrictions
    >>> that turn off potential users. Linus Torvald cautioned aginst this
    >>> when GPL3 was
    >>> issued because he thought the anti-TiVo provisions were unnecessarily
    >>> coercive.

    >>
    >> Typical Micro$oft FUD. From an end user perspective, the GPL is an 'eat
    >> what you want' licence - you can run GPL'd code to your heart's content
    >> whether you are a kid in mom's basement or a multi-national enterprise.
    >> GPL code users have no fear of a FSF 'Goon Squad' coming in the door
    >> and demanding an audit (which is a risk all Windows users face as they
    >> agreed to it under the EULA). And all this is to the

    >
    > Oh, yes please, Mistress! What is the minimum I would have to do in
    > order to get this 'Goon Squad' banging on my door?


    Install a pirated copy of MS WinNT6.1 and connect it to the Internet?


    --
    "Filtering the Internet is like trying to boil the ocean"
    Sweetpea, Mar 25, 2010
    #10
  11. Re: Would Dimdows Be Better Off Without the Zealots and Ideologues?

    In message <hof7g5$ppd$>, Tony Neville wrote:

    > "peterwn" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> GPL code users have no fear of a FSF 'Goon Squad' coming
    >> in the door and demanding an audit (which is a risk all Windows users
    >> face as they agreed to it under the EULA).

    >
    > Oh, yes please, Mistress! What is the minimum I would have to do in
    > order to get this 'Goon Squad' banging on my door?


    Believe me, you don’t want to
    <http://techdirt.com/articles/20091015/0251156547.shtml>.
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Mar 25, 2010
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Linønut

    Re: Linux Zealots

    Linønut, Feb 2, 2005, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    400
    Linønut
    Feb 2, 2005
  2. Shinner
    Replies:
    34
    Views:
    801
    Richard C.
    Sep 30, 2004
  3. 7

    Re: The frustration of the zealots

    7, Nov 10, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    413
  4. 7

    Re: The frustration of the zealots

    7, Nov 10, 2006, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    425
    Joe User
    Nov 11, 2006
  5. impossible

    Have Free Software ideologues lost the plot?

    impossible, Jul 10, 2007, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    75
    Views:
    1,310
    -=rjh=-
    Jul 24, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page