Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 19th Dec 2006 17:40 UTC, submitted by anonymous
Linux "I've been saying for years that Linux was well along on its way from being the tech fanboy operating system of choice, to becoming one of big business' favorite operating systems. Well, I was right all along, but in 2006, that progress smacked many Linux fans in the face. This is my list of the five most significant changes in Linux this year. They are not changes, however, that many who have embraced Linux in the past will appreciate. Like it or lump it, these are the changes that I also think clearly predict Linux's future in the mainstream."
Thread beginning with comment 194319
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
uh
by deanlinkous on Tue 19th Dec 2006 19:38 UTC
deanlinkous
Member since:
2006-06-19

in a nutshell

bunch of proprietary garbage vs staying true to free software

Reply Score: 5

RE: uh
by Fennec_Fox on Tue 19th Dec 2006 19:48 in reply to "uh"
Fennec_Fox Member since:
2006-10-30

Right... So everything which is propriatory is garbage, free as in beer rulez, etc. etc... Well, here is some food for thought - not everybody in the world is willing to sit on a cardboard box just because it's free - some actually might prefer a padded chair. Which, BTW, is also free (as in gratis), but comes with a clause asking you not to break it's legs off. I, for one, prefer to sit on a chair - enjoy your cardboard box.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: uh
by slight on Tue 19th Dec 2006 20:20 in reply to "RE: uh"
slight Member since:
2006-09-10

Congratulations on completely missing the point!

The OP was referring to free as in freedom.

Personally I'm for including nVidia drivers with Ubuntu for example, but I completely understand the argument that accepting binary-only code into distributions reduces pressure on vendors to release open source code (which more and more are starting to do).

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: uh
by melkor on Wed 20th Dec 2006 00:38 in reply to "RE: uh"
melkor Member since:
2006-12-16

You are correct, but proprietary software does have several areas of failing imho, that Free Software betters it in. For most users, they care not for 'freedom', they just want to use it, and they'll pay money to do so.

Dave

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: uh
by CowMan on Wed 20th Dec 2006 13:00 in reply to "RE: uh"
CowMan Member since:
2006-09-26

Yea, but there are many operating systems out there for you if you care to.

What differentiates linux is that the operating system and it's programs are products of - not commodities for - the community. What part of the userbase does not understand that this was entirely developed by their fellow man? Using propriatory software endangers the philosophy on which linux is based.

Propriatory software may run better, right now, on some computers; but without access to the source what are you going to do if say.. you switch to a different architecture? If it doesn't compile right away? Or if you'd like to do something the original authors didn't invision? It may be a short-term benefit, but it's a lock-in. You're at the whim of whomever wrote the binary; if they decide to drop support or charge $, well it's not free then or it probably won't work. Using propriatory software endangers the future stability, flexibility and cross-platform compatibility for which linux currently excels.

If you want the advantages of Linux with propriatory software, there is the ever so pretty MacOS. Video card drivers and (are there any closed-source-and-free-software-programs out there?) their ilk do not do any of us any favours by shipping semi-crippled drivers instead of the source/spec's.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: uh
by trenchsol on Wed 20th Dec 2006 10:19 in reply to "uh"
trenchsol Member since:
2006-12-07

On the contrary, I believe that Linux is too exclusive and too much about ideology, politics, GPL nd FSF. I have started with Red Hat Linux 5.2 in 1999, but this year I have abandoned Linux completely, probably forever.

Until this year there was some kind of balance, but now FSF has taken a lead and they are driving Linux into isolation.

Linux is, and will stay, suitable as a server and for users that are FSF believers. I believe that it is what Linux community realy wanted, so thay can be satisfied now.

DG

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: uh
by Ookaze on Wed 20th Dec 2006 11:29 in reply to "RE: uh"
Ookaze Member since:
2005-11-14

I believe that Linux is too exclusive and too much about ideology, politics, GPL nd FSF

It always was. You don't realise that the very existence of Linux is due to ideology, politics, FSF and the GPL ?
Saying it's too much into the very thing that made it born is ridiculous.

I have started with Red Hat Linux 5.2 in 1999, but this year I have abandoned Linux completely, probably forever

Started at the same time, and even more into it now. You probably never understood FOSS.

Until this year there was some kind of balance, but now FSF has taken a lead and they are driving Linux into isolation

Huh ? There was NEVER any balance, FSF and the GPL were ALWAYS on the lead.
People were saying the exact same thing as you before Open Source was created.
What you're saying about FSF driving anything is nonsense anyway, as FSF has no power to force people to use their license.
People actually prefer GPL, and you can't do anything about it, so you're quick to find a scapegoat to soothe your rage.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: uh
by Soulbender on Wed 20th Dec 2006 14:10 in reply to "RE: uh"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

"Until this year there was some kind of balance, but now FSF has taken a lead and they are driving Linux into isolation."

Except that Linux isn't an FSF project and they have nothing to do with it's direction?

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: uh
by archiesteel on Wed 20th Dec 2006 15:04 in reply to "RE: uh"
archiesteel Member since:
2005-07-02

On the contrary, I believe that Linux is too exclusive and too much about ideology, politics, GPL nd FSF. I have started with Red Hat Linux 5.2 in 1999, but this year I have abandoned Linux completely, probably forever.

If you abandoned Linux because of ideology (as opposed to how useful Linux was to you), isn't that an ideological decision as well? What was the dealbreaker and how did it personally affect your usage of Linux? I'm curious, because I don't understand why someone would stop using an OS just because of the political/philosophical opinions of a group that is not directly related to Linux development.

Until this year there was some kind of balance, but now FSF has taken a lead and they are driving Linux into isolation.

How as the FSF taken a lead? You make a lot of grandiose statements, but are rather stingy on details.

Linux is, and will stay, suitable as a server and for users that are FSF believers. I believe that it is what Linux community realy wanted, so thay can be satisfied now.

I am not what the FSF would consider a "true believer", and yet I see no reason to stop using Linux (with proprietary graphics drivers, to boot). I agree that it's important to convince companies such as NVidia and ATI to release open-source drivers (for pragmatic and economic reasons), but until that happens we'll all just keep using proprietary drivers.

I also don't think that the Linux community "wants" something as a whole, except for Linux to continue to exist. There are so many opinions within the community that one cannot claim they all want the same thing. Even you were (allegedly) part of the Linux community, and clearly you had a different opinion. That enough is proof that the community is far from being monolithic in its beliefs.

Reply Parent Score: 4