Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 9th Aug 2007 17:28 UTC, submitted by vondur
Thread beginning with comment 262105
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
[[What surprised me is he said "they've fragmented a non-windows OS world and for no reason." By that logic I guess I can say Linus should have just stuck with Minix huh?]]
Bah, the implicit assumption is the 'Free' OS world as after all he is talking about the open-sourcing of Solaris, and Minix wasn't Free.
Your remark would have been correct if you have said BSD instead of Minix though.
Bah, the implicit assumption is the 'Free' OS world as after all he is talking about the open-sourcing of Solaris, and Minix wasn't Free.
Your remark would have been correct if you have said BSD instead of Minix though.
Your remark would have been correct if you have said BSD instead of Minix though.
I stand by my remark. Morton's implication was that OpenSolaris shouldn't have forked from Solaris. Linux was derived from Minix. So what I'm getting at is, why does Morton think the OpenSolaris fork is wrong, but Link forking from Minix is ok? Granted, Linux today looks nothing like what it did when Linus first parted it from Minix. Who's to say OpenSolaris won't be radically different from Solaris years from now?





Member since:
2006-03-14
Someone should really post the keynote in its entirety. I went hunting for more of his speech and other sites have more quotes from it. I found one:
http://www.internetnews.com/dev-news/article.php/3693071
The quote that started this mess, plus the bit that ZDNet DID NOT publish in the link above:
What surprised me is he said "they've fragmented a non-windows OS world and for no reason." By that logic I guess I can say Linus should have just stuck with Minix huh?