Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 01:29:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 01:29:18 -0400 Received: from fc.capaccess.org ([151.200.199.53]:35590 "EHLO fc.Capaccess.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 4 Oct 2002 01:29:17 -0400 Message-id: Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2002 01:34:51 -0400 Subject: an open letter to George Soros To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "Rick A. Hohensee" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 4486 Lines: 95 Rick Hohensee 301-595-5804 rickh@capaccess.org Oct. 2, 2002 Mr. George Soros, I believe your involvement in Transmeta is utterly in conflict with your ideals of openness in a way that I don't believe you are aware of. The reasons I believe this are highly technical, and somewhat subtle, and yet quite striking subjectively. Microsoft, as represented by Paul Allen in Transmeta, would surely spend a fortune to keep Linus Torvalds on a leash. For technical reasons, I believe this is why Transmeta was created, and the real potential of an open source software revolution has so far been thereby prevented. Linux's success is mostly inevitable as PC hardware became capable of running unix. Now it is being prevented from succeeding further. I believe similar motives are at work at Red Hat Software, which has many prominent members of the Linux clique on the dole. This would help explain RHAT's historically bizarre IPO circus, and helps to explain why RHAT doesn't really comprehend unix and thinks they are Microsoft. They are Microsoft, who don't comprehend unix. Linus Torvalds consistantly favors modifications to Linux that pursue a server orientation. This invariably leads to tremendous added complexity. This also does not directly threaten what Microsoft calls "the client", i.e. the end-user's PC, i.e. Windows. A servers-only orientation is also a tiny subset of the potential of a free unix. By far the greatest possible benefit of a free unix (which is what Linux is) to individuals and markets is in direct competition with Windows. One might legitimately argue otherwise, but direct competition with Windows has almost completely been avoided, which is very strange. This is what I attempted to do, and was completely ostracized. Whether Torvalds' love of unix's traditional server role is 100% genuine or not, it is a terrible disservice, and is not what George Soros preaches. The open source unix world, including GNU, prevents real effective openness with bogus complexity. In most cases, the so-called open source movement is as hostile to real innovation as Microsoft is. Admittedly, I am exactly the disgruntled, bitter malcontent that would raise such accusations. By the same token, such are the people that see such things. I submit my technical works, and thier utter lack of proliferation, for the interested reader to guage the validity of my accusations, and whether my bitterness is sui generis or justified. I have devised a preliminary compensation scheme for authors of open source software based on the songwriter royalties model. I am the first person ever to insert a Forth-like interpreter into a Linux (or any unix) kernel. This is historic, and was met with a few grunts in the Linux kernel mailing list. There have since been one or two other in-kernel Forths. I did the first syscalls-only linking library in Linux, libsys.a, which I suspect may have sparked the embedded-Linux efforts. I have devised the simplest means by far for a unix user to customize thier directory structure, a very basic convenience. I have written two better systems languages than C; osimplay and H3sm. Many other works in Linux, Forth-like languages, and documentation. At this point, what Linux might have been will not spring from Linus Torvalds. It will therefor probably not spring from unix at all. The parasites have overtaken Linux, just as they did with the Commodore Amiga; they bought it and killed it. Microsoft and Intel absolutely had to kill the Amiga due to it's tremendous superiority to the PC. They packed the board, who then scuttled Commodore. This destructive parasitic process does not have to continue indefinitely, however. As an ancillary matter, but also pertinent to your investment in Transmeta, note that the Crusoe chip's crucial low-power characteristics are a pitiful joke compared to stack machines. I tried meekly to convey this to Torvalds before Crusoe came out. flames > /device/bitbucket Rick Hohensee http://linux01.gwdg.de/~rhohen ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/install/clienux/descriptive ftp://ftp.gwdg.de/pub/linux/install/clienux/interim/ABOUT - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/