Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 13th Jun 2012 22:21 UTC, submitted by Valhalla
Linux The BBC interviews Torvalds. I like this bit: "For me, Linux on the desktop is where I started, and Linux on the desktop is literally what I still use today primarily - although I obviously do have other Linux devices, including an Android phone - so I'd personally really love for it to take over in that market too. But I guess that in the meantime I can't really complain about the successes in other markets." Linux on the desktop is quite passe. Phones and servers is where it's at.
Thread beginning with comment 521927
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Comment by sergio
by WereCatf on Wed 13th Jun 2012 23:11 UTC in reply to "Comment by sergio"
WereCatf
Member since:
2006-02-15

that He did more harm than good in some areas (i.e. allowing binary blobs... or refusing to define an stable ABI in the name of change).


That is a matter of opinion. IMHO it was a positive thing he did those things, not a negative thing. We wouldn't for example have Android if binary blobs weren't allowed.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[2]: Comment by sergio
by Alfman on Wed 13th Jun 2012 23:48 in reply to "RE: Comment by sergio"
Alfman Member since:
2011-01-28

WereCatf,

"We wouldn't for example have Android if binary blobs weren't allowed."

Or maybe we would and open hardware drivers would be more common in android devices. There's no definite way of predicting what would happen to the timeline if variables like this were tweaked.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: Comment by sergio
by WereCatf on Thu 14th Jun 2012 00:10 in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by sergio"
WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

Or maybe we would and open hardware drivers would be more common in android devices.


If you were at all familiar with ARM-world you'd know that's just wishful thinking. All the same drivers would still be closed-source, but we'd just have some other OS instead of Android. Even now you sometimes see this or that manufacturer 'pledge' support for open-source, but then they drag their feet for years and eventually just release an 'optimized' compiler toolchain saying that they never meant to open up their drivers in the first place.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[2]: Comment by sergio
by nt_jerkface on Thu 14th Jun 2012 04:13 in reply to "RE: Comment by sergio"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

"that He did more harm than good in some areas (i.e. allowing binary blobs... or refusing to define an stable ABI in the name of change).


That is a matter of opinion. IMHO it was a positive thing he did those things, not a negative thing. We wouldn't for example have Android if binary blobs weren't allowed.
"

Well in my opinion it's one of the worst OS design decisions of all time.

Android could exist with a stable binary interface. People buy Android because it is an established brand and because they are cheaper than iPhones. No one would care if Samsung's bluetooth driver wasn't open source. Unix can have a stable abi and be successful. See OS/X and iOS for examples.

Linus is a talented programmer but he is also arrogant and unwilling to admit mistakes. He and Greg KH never explained how having some type of a middle ground like a 2 year abi would hurt Linux. They took the extreme position and have stuck with it.

Oh and the idea that "opening ur specs" will result in free drivers proved to be bullshit. There aren't enough open source developers to meet driver demand. You can find driver requests that are years old.

Edited 2012-06-14 04:25 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4