Linux expansion continues at an ever faster pace...


Microsoft no longer a top Linux kernel contributor

After making headlines with its unexpectedly voluminous contributions to the Linux kernel in 2012, Microsoft has all but disappeared from the Linux development scene, according the latest report from the Linux Foundation...

... not entirely surprising, given that Redmond's contributions logged in the 2012 report were almost entirely devoted to adding support for Microsoft technologies to the Linux kernel. Specifically, Microsoft maintains the kernel drivers for its Hyper-V virtualization hypervisor, which consist of tens of thousands of lines of code.

Outside of that work, Microsoft was never a particularly significant contributor to the kernel. In the Linux Foundation's 2012 report, Red Hat, Intel, Novell, and IBM each submitted far more changes than Redmond did...

... new this time around, however, was the expanded role that mobile chipmakers and developers played in kernel development, compared to last year. Freescale, Linaro, Samsung, and Texas Instruments all increased their activity during the period, while Nvidia, Qualcomm, and ARM – all absentees from last year's list – made the top 30 this time...

... the largest single slice of the pie still comes from unaffiliated developers, who contributed 13.6 per cent of all code changes...

... "This rate of change continues to increase, as does the number of developers and companies involved in the process," the Linux Foundation writes in its report. "Thus far, the development process has proved that it is able to scale up to higher speeds without trouble."



City of Munich throws Ubuntu lifeline to Windows XP holdouts

Windows XP users in Germany’s third largest city are being offered free upgrades to Ubuntu ahead of termination of Microsoft support for the OS next Spring...

... If the pattern of Windows XP’s usage in Munich reflects the rest of the world, then that would mean about a third of desktop machines are still on Microsoft’s dated operating system.

Windows XP is the world’s second most popular OS after Windows 7, with users showing little sign of budging – despite the fact there will be no more security updates from Microsoft after 8 April, 2014.

Tempting users to Ubuntu would throw a spanner in the works of Microsoft's plans for Windows XP users to adopt Windows 8.1...

.... Munich elected to end its use of Microsoft to stop its reliance on a single company for its technology needs, which it called a "monopoly-like position". Microsoft fought hard to retain Munich, offering deals and discounts...



One thing that really stands out in all that about the competing Windows world: Why or why are about A THIRD of the Windows world still stuck on something so badly out of date from over a decade ago?!

(Is going "proprietary" to be forever locked into the dungeons of old?... Or is once trapped into proprietary just too expensive to break free?)


IT is very much what we make it...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Or is that some Microsoft sponsored FUD?

Those must be some really good mushrooms you have.

Who needs the mushrooms with Microsoft Marketing like this?


Why does Microsoft Need a "Get the Facts" Campaign?

If you offer a superior product then why would they need a “Get the Facts” campaign?...

Do you ever wonder if publications run Linux stories just to get a little of Microsoft’s ad money? Great business model: Linux developer writes article about great Linux feature. A magazine publishes it. Then, Microsoft buys a “Get the Facts” add. Then the publisher pays the Linux developer. Everyone wins!

Too many studies on the total cost of ownership (TCO) of Windows versus Linux have arrived at vastly different conclusions. ...

... So, I ‘m wondering why they don’t just settled down and make some software instead of worrying about Linux. Personally, I hate those ads, they can mess up a nice web page.


FUD: Microsoft

... leaked internal Microsoft "Halloween documents" stated "OSS [Open Source Software] is long-term credible... [therefore] FUD tactics cannot be used to combat it." Open source software, and the GNU/Linux community in particular, are widely perceived as frequent targets of Microsoft FUD...


Facts behind Microsoft's anti-Linux campaign

Back in 2002, Jim Allchin was co-president of Microsoft's Platforms and Services Division and was, in his own words, "scared" of the momentum behind Linux, as noted...

... the broader reality, one that has seen rampant, massive uptake of Linux over the past six years since Allchin ordered a directive to find and market "the facts."


Industry Best Practice is another way of saying “Follow the Herd”

So I sat with about 150 other "technical decision makers" in a very plush hotel in Holborn [London] while representatives from Microsoft tried their best to convince me that I should not be considering moving to Linux...



IT is very much what wee all make it...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

If you made it a lot easier to insatll maybe more folks would use it. I insatlled it on my wifes laptop. And old celeron xp job. What ticked me off was I had to down load the mint edition and then burn it with an ISO burner, what a crock that is. And of cousre the laptop didmt have a dvd drive just a cd read and write.
Its on the laptop but im afraid to use it just because if I have to ISO burn another program I will delete it.

Linux might be fun for the geek jocks who like to look all important. I just want to download fast and easy and the use the damn computer, not fight installing one.

---

[/quote]

Old James

If you made it a lot easier to insatll maybe more folks would use it. I insatlled it on my wifes laptop. And old celeron xp job. What ticked me off was I had to down load the mint edition and then burn it with an ISO burner, what a crock that is. And of cousre the laptop didmt have a dvd drive just a cd read and write.
Its on the laptop but im afraid to use it just because if I have to ISO burn another program I will delete it.

Linux might be fun for the geek jocks who like to look all important. I just want to download fast and easy and the use the damn computer, not fight installing one.

How do you install Windows if not from a CD?

An ISO is the standard way of distributing CDs in image form, and they're not difficult to burn to disc, most CD burner programs will do it quite easily.

And lets not forget the main point, Mint was free, Windows you'd have had to pay for.

Saying you don't like linux because you had to burn your own disc is just looking for things to complain about?

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

How do you install Windows if not from a CD?

From USB ;-P

So much faster, by the way!

And lets not forget the main point, Mint was free, Windows you'd have had to pay for.

Free is not always the price people are looking for. I'd gladly pay for a license knowing that the software works with everything I want it to. Though I do think the licensing cost of Windows is still too high given scales of economies.

Whereas with Linux, there is no easy escalation feature for administrative ("super user") actions, and it doesn't work with all binaries available for Linux which might leave the person having to compile their own. WINE seems to be unacceptable for gaming with the latest games, though Steam is trying to fix that. It was far too much of a hassle for even me to deal with - and I love the command line.

Simon, you Linux devotees are no different to ID banging on about his particular ideology and beliefs, you simply won't take no for an answer. Linux users are a very small minority of computer users, and they always will be. They are no different to the JW's banging on my door. I will say to Linux users the same as I say to the JW's ...

If your religion/software was that popular, you wouldn't need to go around flogging it on peoples doorsteps/bulletin boards like seedy double glazing salesmen. It might mean something to you, it doesn't to virtually everybody else.

JW advocates 8 million - world population 7 billion - 0.1%
Computer users 2.6 billion - Linux users - 650 million - 2.55%

It's a Wintel world whether you like it or whether you don't. Whether it should be is another matter entirely. There is an old adage that says "Empty vessels make the most noise" which seems entirely appropriate in both cases above.

Enough already!

I was merely responding to some of the points raised in his post. I accept that many people prefer Windows, some people also prefer coffee to tea, i don't understand them myself but i accept their existence.

Intelligent Design (the concept and the individual) doesn't fall into this category however, they refuse to accept other opinions as being valid and never shift from their own blinkered point of view.
The other difference is that Windows and Linux are both valid ways of using a computer, and the existence of one does not preclude the other. Intelligent Design (the concept) & religion, and science & evolution however are mutually exclusive, one of them is provably correct, and the other demonstrably wrong, i've already made clear which is which.

So to summarise, i resent being lumped into the same category as Intelligent Design (the individual) when it comes to such discussions, and i'd rather you didn't do it again.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Simon, methinks you protest too much :-) I was pointing out that some people are too vociferous in standing up for their personal beliefs when the majority do not agree with them. ID's beliefs are in the minority but it doesn't bother him, he is happy to keep on banging his particular drum, to the extent that he regularly goes on vacation. Linux users are also in the minority, but mostly are quite up front in supporting their own view that their OS is best against anything else. In that respect they are similar.

Okay i'll conceed that, we do have a habit of seeming to regard Windows users as mistaken and/or foolish.

You are not the same as ID the person, because although you may have strong views about Linux, you don't behave in the same way that he does.

Thank you.

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

How do you install Windows if not from a CD?

From USB ;-P

Strange... I'm sure that's been done for most Linux distros for many years now. "Hybrid" ISOs have been around for some long time now that can be burnt to CD/DVD or directly written to USB and just simply work.

The only temporary hiccup has been for the (anticompetitive) mangling of the UEFI standard whereby only a certain vendor's software is permitted to boot...

Even that has now been pretty much fully overcome:

Booting a Self-signed Linux Kernel

Now that The Linux Foundation is a member of the UEFI.org group, I’ve been working on the procedures for how to boot a self-signed Linux kernel on a platform so that you do not have to rely on any external signing authority.

After digging through the documentation out there, it turns out to be relatively simple in the end, so here’s a recipe for how...

We don’t need no stinkin bootloaders!...


Note, that's a whole load of developers-speak. The bootloader "work-around" is no longer needed and so expect to see in the near future Linux distros booting without the need of a bootloader shim for UEFI locked-down systems. That should shave another second off boot-up times.

... Whereas with Linux, there is no easy escalation feature for administrative ("super user") actions...

Don't know where you're coming from on that one... Load up a mainstream distro and whatever "administrative features" are usually nicely packaged in some distro manager panel. All nicely point'n'click if ever needed.


For myself, I still occasionally spin up a Linux "LiveCD" that runs directly from a USB stick on whatever random hardware to get things done, or even to debug a broken Windows system. Works well. (Not as fast as using a HDD installed system but beautifully portable!)


IT is what we make it, and for some others what is believed to be...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Linux branches out into a whole new world:


IBM proffers $1bn for Linux development on Power

Rising open source tide carries all boats, IBM hopes

... The one-two punch combination of letting major tech firms such as Google and Nvidia license and pick apart the chips, and chucking money toward development of Linux and Linux-based applications running on top of Power, can be seen as IBM's attempt to create a niche for the Power architecture that is defensible in an age where Intel/AMD x86 and ARM systems are set to rule servers, computers, and mobile devices...

... "The era of big data calls for a new approach to IT systems; one that is open, customizable, and designed from the ground up to handle big data and cloud workloads,"...

... The development money comes at a time that IBM is hugging other open source technologies...


IT is what we make it...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

How do you install Windows if not from a CD?

From USB ;-P

Strange...

I was merely pointing out that you can install Windows from medium other than CDs/DVDs. I never claimed Linux didn't have this capability.

... Whereas with Linux, there is no easy escalation feature for administrative ("super user") actions...

Don't know where you're coming from on that one... Load up a mainstream distro and whatever "administrative features" are usually nicely packaged in some distro manager panel. All nicely point'n'click if ever needed.

You may have not understood what I was saying. In Windows Vista and later, even a user that has Administrative access to the machine, all applications are run as a standard user. Any functions requiring Administrative access then prompts for elevation to Administrator User. If the currently logged on user has Administrative access, a UAC prompt simply provides a Yes/No option. If the currently logged on user does not have Administrative access, UAC prompts for an account that does.

Is there a way to run as a standard user on Linux, but prompt for elevation without having to go to the terminal and use the SUDO command? I wasn't asking for Administrative Features; I was asking for auto-elevation with a prompt confirming the administrative action(s).

And please don't respond with opinions on "UAC silliness". I rather like the feature.

... Is there a way to run as a standard user on Linux, but prompt for elevation without having to go to the terminal and use the SUDO command? ...

Yes... That is the normal way of doing such things on such as Ubuntu and others for the mainstream desktops for the "sudo"-style distros (that do not even have the root account directly accessible). A "enter you user password" dialog pops up[*] to prompt you to check it really is you who really wants to do that.

A variation on that for other distros that do use an explicit root account is that you would enter the root password (rather than your user password).


You have a choice of distro for whichever style you prefer. Sorry, noone has bothered to implement a Windows-style UAC nag prompt. (Great care is needed not to teach users to blindly click-things-away.)


IT is what we make it,
Martin

[*]: Usually, that is enabled only for the first user listed during install or for first setup. Any other users for such privilege must be enabled by adding them to the "sudo" or "wheel" group or whatever for that distro.

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Yes... That is the normal way of doing such things on such as Ubuntu and others for the mainstream desktops for the "sudo"-style distros (that do not even have the root account directly accessible). A "enter you user password" dialog pops up[*] to prompt you to check it really is you who really wants to do that.

...

You have a choice of distro for whichever style you prefer. Sorry, noone has bothered to implement a Windows-style UAC nag prompt. (Great care is needed not to teach users to blindly click-things-away.)

The prompt you mention in the first paragraph is the UAC-style "nag prompt" if I understand you correctly - and I believe I do because now that you mention it, I do recall seeing such a prompt when I last played around with Mint.

Though I do find it interesting that such a feature in Linux is OK, but when Windows does it, you refer to it as a "nag prompt". Makes me think you really don't understand the UAC purpose and the security it provides, yet it's purpose seems to be the same on Linux.

... Though I do find it interesting that such a feature in Linux is OK, but when Windows does it, you refer to it as a "nag prompt". Makes me think you really don't understand the UAC purpose and the security it provides, yet it's purpose seems to be the same on Linux.

Frequency of use and scope?

The Windows "UAC" is more like the security enhancements that are a part of SELinux. All well and good but there is quite an administrative burden in managing such fine grained security restrictions. SELinux is also more certain in that you don't get a UAC-nag in that the restrictions are very definitely there and they are not expected to be excused. So no nag - all applications have to work as expected or they get killed.

So, the main difference there is that the Windows UAC can be called up by any Windows program for any 'admin' feature trigger.

In Linux, access to the 'admin' programs is limited in the first place. Once past the check, you have the freedom to administratively do as you please with any number of programs/applications/features without further nagging for each one.

Also, for Windows UAC, there is just the one quick blind click to "click it away". That dangerously reinforces a Pavlovian response in busy people not to take the time and trouble to read and understand what is (anomalously) on the screen...


IT is what we make it...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

One thing that really stands out in all that about the competing Windows world: Why or why are about A THIRD of the Windows world still stuck on something so badly out of date from over a decade ago?!

Because it was paid for long ago and if it still works why change.

---

SELinux is also more certain in that you don't get a UAC-nag in that the restrictions are very definitely there and they are not expected to be excused. So no nag - all applications have to work as expected or they get killed.

Therein lies the problem for Windows: application developers have long assumed that the user will always have administrative rights to their machine, so they have always written their programs to be able to do whatever they want to on that machine. This isn't a Microsoft problem so much as it is a developer problem of not following best practices.

A user wouldn't be "nagged" with UAC prompts if the engineering environment is done correctly.

So, the main difference there is that the Windows UAC can be called up by any Windows program for any 'admin' feature trigger.

Very true, though "shims" can be created to allow programs to work without requiring administrative rights, depending on what the application is trying to do. But this still goes back to: if application developers would stop assuming they have free reign on the Windows platform to do whatever they want, applications wouldn't be nagging users to make changes. Things have been in place for a while now to allow applications to only make changes in the user space instead of the entire machine scope, yet developers are only recently coding for such due to the tighter restrictions in place by Microsoft in trying to get everyone to conform to this.

In Linux, access to the 'admin' programs is limited in the first place. Once past the check, you have the freedom to administratively do as you please with any number of programs/applications/features without further nagging for each one.

In theory, the UAC prompt should be a very limited and rare occurrence as well. Again, and back to: developers need to stop assuming the currently logged in user has full control. Microsoft, in an effort to increase security and reduce the attack surface of exploits, has locked down certain areas of Windows (\Program Files, Program Files(x86), HKLM\ to name a few). If developers weren't trying to write to any of these locations, UAC prompts would not occur as frequently.

Microsoft has tried to rectify this for over a decade, with many developers getting angry in thinking Microsoft is telling them what to do. That view seems curious to me in that the proposed changes would be good for the platform as a whole, yet it's very difficult to get everyone to cooperate. And you're still going to get accusations of "monopolistic control" toward Microsoft, which I feel is an unfair accusation to level.

Also, for Windows UAC, there is just the one quick blind click to "click it away". That dangerously reinforces a Pavlovian response in busy people not to take the time and trouble to read and understand what is (anomalously) on the screen...

You can only "click it away" if you have administrator rights and aren't reading. If you don't have administrative rights, you don't get a Yes/No prompt. You get prompted for an account that does have administrative rights - much harder to click away. You can click Cancel, then you can't do what you needed to do, thus slowing you down and causing you to read what the prompt is saying. Microsoft Best Practice for over 15 years is to always run with a limited user account, and use Run As for actions that require administrative access. UAC simplifies the Run As process so that you don't have to right-click and Run As or use the command line to perform an action.

But that will goes back to the mentality of the user, which doesn't change with OS. So it wouldn't matter if it was Windows or Linux, if the user is so careless as to click away a prompt, they're going to do it regardless of OS.


It seems to me, thematically that you wish to hold Microsoft responsible for all that is wrong, and then when Microsoft takes steps to rectify their problems, you continue to castigate them for their monopolistic business practices in forcing people to do stuff. It really seems that they cannot win with you and people that think like you. I think that's an unfair position to take.

SELinux is also more certain...

Therein lies the problem for Windows: application developers have long assumed that the user will always have administrative rights to their machine, so they have always written their programs to be able to do whatever they want to on that machine. This isn't a Microsoft problem so much as it is a developer problem of not following best practices...

... Microsoft Best Practice for over 15 years is to always run with a limited user account, and use Run As for actions that require administrative access.

Which runs against historical practices and historical developments where Windows was assumed to be a single user isolated single system.

Granted, we've moved a long long way onwards from those days many years ago, and yet... There still appears to be a lot of hubris locked-in in the Windows architecture and in developer methods.

But that will goes back to the mentality of the user, which doesn't change with OS. So it wouldn't matter if it was Windows or Linux, if the user is so careless as to click away a prompt, they're going to do it regardless of OS.

Indeed so. And quite rightly so, users should not need to worry about OS security nor need to be reminded of it.

Which is one outcome that is very different between the historical evolution of *nix systems such as Linux and the CP/M -> DOS -> ... evolution of Windows.

It seems to me, thematically that you wish to hold Microsoft responsible for all that is wrong, and then when Microsoft takes steps to rectify their problems, you continue to castigate them for their monopolistic business practices in forcing people to do stuff. It really seems that they cannot win...

There have been some rather, "shall we say" "underhand" goings on that has benefited noone other than Microsoft in the short term. Even now, some of that silliness is now coming back to bite everyone in the IT world. Noone has benefited overall and especially not the users.

Meanwhile, Linus has been unobtrusively doing his stuff with Linux and being no more obnoxious than being a little outspoken on Linux matters on occasion.


All for the freedom of The Users...

IT is what we make it,
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Some very good responses from you, and I agree with most of what you said.

Which is one outcome that is very different between the historical evolution of *nix systems such as Linux and the CP/M -> DOS -> ... evolution of Windows.

Agreed, but that evolution is from a user's perspective. A developer should know better. Though I've quickly learned over the years that most developers (not all) are as bad as regular users in understanding how the platform works for which they are coding on.

So while it may have appeared to evolve from CP/M -> DOS -> Windows as a single user environment, this is very technically incorrect.

In reality, the original Windows is dead, and has been dead for quite some time. The evolution that occurred from CP/M -> DOS -> Windows ended with Windows ME. Everything from Windows for Workgroups 3.1x to Windows ME ran on a DOS kernel, and had multi-user functionality poorly designed into the shell built on top of the kernel, when the kernel simply needed to be re-done from the ground up with multi-users in mind to truly be a multi-user platform.

Enter in the evolution of IBM's OS/2 project, when Microsoft split off and started with Windows NT 3.1. The groundwork was laid for a multi-user environment which was then introduced in Windows NT 4.0, and has been refined with every successive Windows release since.

A proper evolution tree would look more like this:

CP/M -> DOS -> Windows 9x/ME

OS/2 -> Windows NT

There is very little reason for developers to continue to assume that nothing has changed with the passing of Windows 9x to the Windows NT kernel other than complete apathy and carelessness. They've had nearly 20 years to make the correct changes to their coding habits, but because they weren't forced to change earlier, recent changes to protect the underlying OS have made these bad habits effect the overall user experience on the Windows platform in the form of excessive UAC prompts.

I fully agree that users should not need to be constantly reminded of security, but I do think it should be everyone's concern to be mindful of it. Fortunately, most coders are starting to adhere to best practices, and UAC prompts are becoming quite a rare thing. Things have been moving in the right direction, if not a bit slowly while trying to get everyone to catch on to best practices. I suspect that if Linux had to undergo a large change in approach that was fundamentally different than how they started, they would have a similar hard time waiting for the industry to catch up.

All for the freedom of The Users...

An appropriate question would be: free from what? From one regime to the next? It seems to me that there are forces in the Linux world that may be just as oppressive as Microsoft while giving the public perception of "freedom".

Meanwhile, Linus has been unobtrusively doing his stuff with Linux and being no more obnoxious than being a little outspoken on Linux matters on occasion.

Speaking of which, and I think you're greatly understating Linus' poor attitude, this was brought up again at a recent conference with the kernel developers:

"Jon Brodkin @ ArsTechnica.com wrote:

Torvalds has long been known for the creative insults, threats of violence, and curse words he hurls at developers who give him what he deems to be bad code. Sharp recently called him out, saying, "Keep it professional on the mailing lists."

Torvalds replied that he is "not interested" in acting professional and attributed his frequent cursing to his Finnish culture. "I simply don't believe in being polite or politically correct," he wrote.

Torvalds hasn't changed course. Earlier this month, he expressed hope that some ARM SoC hardware designers "all die in some incredibly painful accident."

“So if you see any, send them my love and possibly puncture the brake-lines on their car and put a little surprise in their coffee, OK?" he wrote.

Such conflicts were never mentioned in today's panel, but Sharp got a round of applause when she said she hopes for a more welcoming environment to newcomers. "I'd like to make sure our community is inclusive to all people that want to contribute," she said. "Getting more diversity, getting more diverse voices in our community is something I'd like to see."

I tend to agree with Sharp's views, and I personally think Linus shouldn't be blaming his poor demeanor on culture. There's no real excuse for it, IMHO.

... I think you're greatly understating Linus' poor attitude, this was brought up again at a recent conference with the kernel developers:

"Jon Brodkin @ ArsTechnica.com wrote:

Torvalds has long been known for the creative insults, threats of violence, and curse words he hurls at developers who give him what he deems to be bad code. Sharp recently called him out, saying, "Keep it professional on the mailing lists."

Torvalds replied that he is "not interested" in acting professional and attributed his frequent cursing to his Finnish culture. "I simply don't believe in being polite or politically correct," he wrote.

Torvalds hasn't changed course. Earlier this month, he expressed hope that some ARM SoC hardware designers "all die in some incredibly painful accident." ...

I tend to agree with Sharp's views, and I personally think Linus shouldn't be blaming his poor demeanor on culture. There's no real excuse for it, IMHO.

And from that, you are very clearly ignorant of the circumstances and too easily swayed by the out-of-context popularist press.

Ms Sharp was painfully called out trying to sneak into the kernel some non-ready and suspect code. Likely for the sake of meeting arbitrary industrial deadlines. She appeared to be rather badly taken aback for (a) being "found out", and (b) for having her crap unready code rejected and thrown out. Kernel standards do have to be maintained. In the FLOSS world, industry can wait until they eventually can do a good job. (Took well over a year for Microsoft to get their code good enough to be accepted, including their Big B**bs.)

And as for the morass of ARM SoC: That is clearly a case of hardware companies not giving a s**t and needlessly adding an awful lot of unnecessary expense and needless extra work and confusion and incompatibility that has to be overcome onto all the lives of the software developers.


So which do you prefer?

Harsh words and the overall full system working well and sweet and smooth.

Or someone who is "PC" and all for the trashy unreliability greater expense for all?


My own opinion is that certain industrialists can suffer the greatest deprivations that Monty Python can devise in his worst dreams and Suffer The Full Force of the word Ni!

In any case, an inventively contrived insult is good fun and notable in the black-and-white world of computer binaries. It also shows you've been noticed and should be taken as a bit of a compliment!


Now please do produce some useful clean code that is up to standard and useful to the world.


Such is the world of FLOSS and open Peer Review.

IT is very much what we make it...
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

And from that, you are very clearly ignorant of the circumstances and too easily swayed by the out-of-context popularist press.

I take offense to your claim of ignorance on my part. Simply because I hold a view, doesn't mean that view is shaped solely by a single source - I would hope you give people more credit than that. I really don't care what the circumstances are, the ends do not justify the means. There is absolutely no excuse for being rude, foul mouthed, or wishing people dead, or any of the other various things Linus spews out of his mouth.

So which do you prefer?

Harsh words and the overall full system working well and sweet and smooth.

Or someone who is "PC" and all for the trashy unreliability greater expense for all?

How about settling in the middle? No one is asking him to be PC, the problem is with the overly done foul-mouthed attitude toward fellow developers. You don't have to be PC to simply show respect to other people.

In any case, an inventively contrived insult is good fun and notable in the black-and-white world of computer binaries. It also shows you've been noticed and should be taken as a bit of a compliment!

Ummmm... no. Maybe there was a time and place for that kind of attitude in the past, but it creates an exclusive environment that is overtly hostile toward newcomers. Times have changed and Linus should respect that and learn to change as well.

I am honestly surprised at you Martin for taking up such a stance on this. No one should be advocating such ill-behaved manners in a professional environment. Perhaps it is time for Linus to step down if he is unwilling to see that.