Message-Id: <5.0.0.25.0.20010216170349.01efc030@mail.etinc.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 17:27:31 -0500
To: jesse@cats-chateau.net, A.J.Scott@casdn.neu.edu,
        "Andrew Scott" <A.J.Scott@casdn.neu.edu>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
From: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com>
Subject: Re: Linux stifles innovation...
In-Reply-To: <01021613494900.00295@tabby>
In-Reply-To: <3A8CF1FE.16672.10105D@localhost>
 <3A8CF1FE.16672.10105D@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org

At 02:48 PM 02/16/2001, Jesse Pollard wrote:
>On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Andrew Scott wrote:
> >On 15 Feb 2001, at 9:49, fsnchzjr wrote:
> >
> >> Watch Microsoft's Jim Allchin go Linux-bashing!!!
> >> Nice little article on how we're all going to die of herpes from our
> >> repeated exposition to Linux...
> >> 
> http://news.cnet.com/investor/news/newsitem/0-9900-1028-4825719-RHAT.html?ta
> >> g=ltnc
> >
> >That's about as self-serving a statement as I've ever seen. If this
> >'Jim Alchin' actually believes what he's saying, he's got to be one
> >of the worlds biggest fools, and if he doesn't believe what he's
> >saying, well there aren't too many words that would accurately
> >describe what he is.
> >
> >It's pretty funny in some ways, e.g. "We can build a better product
> >than Linux...", which begs the question, "Well, why don't you?".
> >Perhaps it costs too much?

objective, arent we?

There is much truth to the concept, although Microsoft should not be ones 
to comment on it as such.

For example, if there were six different companies that marketed ethernet 
drivers for the eepro100, you'd have a choice of which one to buy..perhaps 
with different "features" that were of value to you. Instead, you have 
crappy GPL code that locks up under load, and its not worth spending 
corporate dollars to fix it because you have to give away your work for 
free under GPL. And since there is a "free" driver that most people can 
use, its not worth building a better mousetrap either because the market is 
too small. So, the handful of users with problems get to "fit it 
themselves", most of whom cant of course.

Theres also the propensity for mediocre stuff to get into the kernel 
because some half-baked programmer was willing to contribute some code. The 
50% of the kernel that remains "experimental" ad infinitum is evidence of that.

The biggest thing that the linux community does to stifle innovation is to 
bash commercial vendors trying to make a profit by whining endlessly about 
"sourceless" distributions and recommending "open-source" solutions even 
when they are wholly inferior. You're only hurting yourselves in the long 
run. In that respect MS is correct, because those with the dollars to 
innovate will stay away.

DB

-
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/