Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 00:39:08 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 00:38:57 -0500 Received: from bgnet.bg ([212.56.2.2]:31237 "EHLO bgnet.bg") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 17 Feb 2001 00:38:46 -0500 Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 07:39:49 +0000 (UTC) From: Vesselin Atanasov To: Dennis cc: jesse@cats-chateau.net, Andrew Scott , Andrew Scott , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux stifles innovation... In-Reply-To: <5.0.0.25.0.20010216170349.01efc030@mail.etinc.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hahahaha. Dennis, the only linux network drivers that I have had serious problems with were yours. They caused kernel panic on 2.0.30+ every 6 hours. Of course I did not have the source to fix them. In comparision eepro100 works rock solid on all of my machines that use it. Will I use some binary only drivers again? No thanks! On Fri, 16 Feb 2001, Dennis wrote: > 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/ > - 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/