Flux is an independent online news source that covers politics, religion, philosophy, and technology, and the way that they intersect. I sat down with its founder, and talked about the state of the operating system world in 1997 when I started OSNews, and what has changed since then, both in the computing realm and in the political milieu that pervades our lives. We talked about Microsoft and Apple, UNIX and Linux, the rise and fall of general purpose computing, and how the rise of platforms based on hardware/software/marketplace ecosystems has changed the landscape for what makes an OS platform viable and relevant.
You can read a transcript, listen to the podcast, or watch a video of our conversation
This discussion is aimed at the more-mainstream audience of Flux’s Theory of Change podcast, but as you can tell from the conversation, Sheffield is a huge nerd and is very interested in discussions of computing, and how it intersects with politics. On that topic, he and I are laying the groundwork to collaborate on a regular podcast, a partnership between OSNews and Flux. I’d love to hear your advice and feedback on topics that you’d be interested in having us cover, people that you’d like to have us interview, or if you’d be interested in participating in some way, let me know.
The only reason these platforms have any success.. is because it is what we are given, and market pressure… it has nothing to do with what we are being given, being what we want.
Great conversation! Lots of topics very well summarized and analyzed from multiple perspectives. There are any number of topics in there that could be spun off into individual in-depth podcasts in the future methinks.
The talk repeats a bit of marketing BS about which I hoped that the presenters would know better.
To quote my own answer to this FAQ on Quora:
This is a widely-repeated lie.
Gates did not “save” Apple. Microsoft did not “invest” in Apple.
Microsoft stole Apple code. Apple sued. The companies settled out of court.
The famous US$150M payment from MS to Apple was not an investment. It was punitive damages. Microsoft Video for Windows contained code stolen from Apple QuickTime. The money was MS paying the penalty.
Citations:
* Stop the lies! The day that Microsoft ‘saved’ Apple | ZDNet (https://www.zdnet.com/article/stop-the-lies-the-day-that-microsoft-saved-apple/)
* San Francisco Canyon Company – Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company)
lproven,
I think the truth is in the middle. Microsoft did steal quicktime code from apple (albeit through indirect parties). The terms of the settlement were undisclosed, so it’s impossible to say what it was. But I would counter that an investment in exchange for real stock is hardly a punishment for the crime. If I copied microsoft or apple code for use in my own commercial products and I got caught… punishing me by having me become an investor in their companies is just bizarre.
Obviously each side wants to control the narrative but I think there is some truth to the conventional wisdom that apple needed microsoft too, particularly with office to stay relevant with consumers. Microsoft for it’s part doesn’t do anything out of generosity, they used apple as a tool to harm netscape and sun by arranging for macs to use microsoft’s JVM and browser.
It’s remarkable how much of the tech industry gets decided by underhanded corporate infighting…
http://roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/5F0C866C-6DDF-4A9A-9515-531B0CA0C29C.html
I heavily skimmed the transcript as I felt there was going to be very little in it I didn’t know already and this turned out to be the case. On the positive side it was a roundtrip of a lot of pressing issues so going to be interesting to someone. I personally feel some of the views expressed would benefit from a deeper and rounder discussion, and maybe not everything in one go. That’s an observation not a criticism.
On a historical note in the UK prior to 1997 informed political discussion and analysis used to be taken for granted. Since then and with succession (typically Conservative) governments power has centralised, politics has polarised, and an avalanche of issues highlighted by this interview has become the dominant theme of today what with Brexit and democracies all around the world coming under intense pressure. Myself I feel the tech world “as is” lacks the spark and promise it once did and ethics and social values have been sidelined although I note in some quarters there is enthusiasm for developing this kind of discussion.