Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 23rd Jul 2009 22:53 UTC, submitted by Remy Chi Jian Suen
Editorial So, Microsoft submits 20000 lines of code to the Linux kernel, all licensed under the GPL. Microsoft, who considers Linux a great threat, and once called the GPL a "cancer". Opinions on this one are flying all around us, but what does Linus Torvalds, Linux' benevolent dictator, think about all this?
Thread beginning with comment 374980
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: I agree...
by niemau on Fri 24th Jul 2009 03:20 UTC in reply to "RE[6]: I agree..."
niemau
Member since:
2007-06-28

Looks like you are trying to justify the hate to MS at any cost, But hate whatever it comes from id bad.


you're misrepresenting the parent's statements as justifying hate, when that's obviously not the case.

my position goes like this, and is far more common than the 'hate' you would assign to anybody uninterested in MS:

microsoft *is* an agressive company whose highest ranking corporate officers have made plainly clear their intentions to essentially do away with FOSS.

because of their repetitive reliance on unfair business practices and willingness to, quite frankly, illegally destroy competition, we as consumers are given a choice. we can use MS products and technologies or we can choose to NOT use MS products and technologies.

note: this is NOT hate. this is a rational response to a repeated threat vector. MS is a corporation. it is not a person. corporations do not deserve a persistent benefit-of-the-doubt scenario as would be given to a human being making human mistakes. they should have been shut down or split up years ago.

i certainly don't *hate* microsoft. MS isn't worth my hate. i just want them out of my life, because they do me more harm than good. this is the position of most people who choose to avoid MS products.

i want to facepalm every time somebody calls me a blind MS-hater. it isn't blind; and, it isn't hate. i just want to maintain the ability to ignore them, as best as possible.

Reply Parent Score: 14

RE[8]: I agree...
by lemur2 on Fri 24th Jul 2009 03:28 in reply to "RE[7]: I agree..."
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

"Looks like you are trying to justify the hate to MS at any cost, But hate whatever it comes from id bad.
you're misrepresenting the parent's statements as justifying hate, when that's obviously not the case. my position goes like this, and is far more common than the 'hate' you would assign to anybody uninterested in MS: microsoft *is* an agressive company whose highest ranking corporate officers have made plainly clear their intentions to essentially do away with FOSS. because of their repetitive reliance on unfair business practices and willingness to, quite frankly, illegally destroy competition, we as consumers are given a choice. we can use MS products and technologies or we can choose to NOT use MS products and technologies. note: this is NOT hate. this is a rational response to a repeated threat vector. MS is a corporation. it is not a person. corporations do not deserve a persistent benefit-of-the-doubt scenario as would be given to a human being making human mistakes. they should have been shut down or split up years ago. i certainly don't *hate* microsoft. MS isn't worth my hate. i just want them out of my life, because they do me more harm than good. this is the position of most people who choose to avoid MS products. i want to facepalm every time somebody calls me a blind MS-hater. it isn't blind; and, it isn't hate. i just want to maintain the ability to ignore them, as best as possible. "

Hear, hear.

That is so good that it is worth repeating.

If I had not already commented on this thread, I would mod your post up as truly insightful.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[8]: I agree...
by nachokb on Fri 24th Jul 2009 14:56 in reply to "RE[7]: I agree..."
nachokb Member since:
2009-07-13

I couldn't agree more.

BTW, can somebody point me to *anyone* who has complained about this Microsoft contribution?? Why the rage?? Is it all speculation?? Or are they again simply trying to portray FOSS guys as immature hippie whiners? It seems to me that some commenter said something stupid and the media, being desperate to get a story where there isn't one, is attributing that to FOSS people...

OTOH, when someone says that everything RMS says or do is because he hates MS, it makes me laugh. The guy has kept consistent to his message for 30 years (and then he might even not have heard of MS), never mentions MS without "or any other proprietary company", and it all, frankly, smells of desperate faux-journalists [1]. When they mock his values as hippies or extremist, that gets me angry.

Furthermore, this hysteria seems to be inhibiting some needed analysis, as MS has previously been criticized for using GPL software (TCP/IP stack) while vilifying and downright FUDing its very license, to the point that they chose to rewrite it all. With this release, the next adjective they choose to throw at it will be perceived as a joke. Their message got slightly weakened (they surely must be needing to boost Hyper-V). How MS's attack position on FOSS evolves is important.

nachokb

[1] "There hasn’t been a Richard Stallman “over my dead body” diatribe about the Microsoft code (yet)." --- http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=3414

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[9]: I agree...
by Mark Williamson on Fri 24th Jul 2009 15:14 in reply to "RE[8]: I agree..."
Mark Williamson Member since:
2005-07-06


Furthermore, this hysteria seems to be inhibiting some needed analysis, as MS has previously been criticized for using GPL software (TCP/IP stack) while vilifying and downright FUDing its very license, to the point that they chose to rewrite it all.


When did MS use a GPL TCP/IP stack? I know they moved to a BSD-based one (around Win 2K, I think), as the license allowed (in fact, AFAIK they have publicly stated that they approve of the BSD and similar licenses).

Reply Parent Score: 3