> Hi jacob3223,
> Firstly Linux is already a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.
> > I am concerned with the growing number of linux distrobutions
> > unavailable or extrememly inconveniant to users with a less then dsl
> > service
> Use Debian then. It's not even a commercial distribution.
The larger danger is the fact that there *are* so many distributions --
making 3rd parties unwilling to publish software for all distributions (if
at all) and then having to support multiple systems with possible kernel
alterations or 'improvements' by the users.
> > also as the following for linux grows will micro$oft or some other
> > vested intrest company attempt a grab at the gnu lincense by modifieing
> > linux just enough to make it uncompatible with standerd linux and thus
> > make the common user more inclined toward there version because of the
> > infamy of their name...
> Flawed reasoning:
> 1. Microsoft is not the gatekeeper of Linux.
> 2. If they modify GNU code they'll have to release the source code of
> modifications or in the least suffer such extremely bad press that they'll
> become known as the evil empire and the laughing stock of the world (sic).
As if MS would care? Don't all Linux users already feel this way anyway??
Quote:> 3. Many people in the Linux community will look to those with prestige for
> advice on how to proceed if a MS distribution of Linux becomes available.
> MS plays fair then they will eventually be embraced.
MS is not embraced because they do or do not play fair. They are embraced
because they offer a product which people want.
MS is smart. They know what people largely want. They deliver.
MS would not be dumb enough to make a GNU licensed Linux. They would simply
start over with a new 'free' OS designed exclusively to compete with Linux -
and it would be compatible.
Then, MS would throw their vast resources at making it actually a
well-written and tested OS rather than a series of patches around a kernel.
They would throw resources at writing applications that people would
actually use and want to use. They would centralize development or have
some organization responsible for screening the outside work if they did
publish the source code (under *their* own license and not GNU).
> > linux as we all know is at a less then mature level of development as
> > an os(lack of drivers and uncompatability with hardware)
> Repeating this doesn't make it true.
But to all people that use Linux (like myself), we do know it is true.
Saying it isn't true doesn't make it not true.
> > but as it advances how will the other big vested intrests react to it?
> > if in 5 years time 50% of the server world and 25% of the standerd user
> > world running Linux instead of windows or Unix what will happen?
> > will big intrests attempt a squash down on linux before then?
> They can't.
But they could effectively compete by other means.
> > or will one of the major distributers of linux now ie.red hat or
> > macmillin sell there intrests to one of them who would be able to make
> > linux more compatible and also charge money for this compatability>?
> > i mean teh GNU protects the OS but not the applications for it and as
> > we have seen before microsoft protects everything
> That's why there's a big push to create GNU productivity applications as
Nobody wants to do this without getting compensated. And most do not want
to give out *their* source code.
Reasons why GNU apps. will *never* be able to compete with MS offerings.
> > so as we move along in the road linux as an OS where will we be when
> > big intests and the powers that be take a serious intrest in takeing
> > back what linux stole?
> Again they can't. The most they can do is provide essential and valuable
> services that free software users cannot access. And they will have to be
> compelling that people will want to stay/switch back to Windows. Who knows
> (speculation), free versions of Age of Empires III and Quake 4 funded by
> Microsoft that only runs on Windows could be enough :-) And in our
> entertainment-centric world this could indeed be enough!
X-Box is on the horizon, and it looks *cool*. MS has already lined up tons
of developers, including EA.
All of these developers *must* use DirectX 8 to write their games -- the
same exact DirectX 8 as Windows 2000, ME and soon Whistler will incorporate.
More games for Windows, more focus on DirectX, less on OpenGL and Linux.