11 ms·

This quote is one of my favorite Linus quotes ever. Bashing on Microsoft is such an 'in' thing to do and honestly it's so pointless. Many IT folk are stuck us

by spkthed 17y ago

This quote is one of my favorite Linus quotes ever. Bashing on Microsoft is such an 'in' thing to do and honestly it's so pointless. Many IT folk are stuck using their products for any of a number of reasons. Many of their products simply are the best fit for specific applications. It's so irritating to hear the constant Microsoft Sucks(tm) from people that either honestly know little about it or that bash unnecessarily. Every OS sucks, none are perfect. The biggest gripe I have with that attitude is that it destroys the FOSS, Apple, and Linux movements. People that are new to the IT world don't have years of backgrounds with projects and are going to be picking up on the attitudes of the people already there as well as struggling through technical problems. If they're instantly exposed to a very negative attitude (towards themselves, others, or really anything) it's going to be a huge turnoff to whatever project it is. The negative/hateful attitude that a lot of people have towards Microsoft actively hurts the same cause that they're trying to help. The other part of that is that with any social interaction someone that is constantly putting something down is perceived (usually rightfully so) as being insecure about their own inadequacies. I don't know about others, but Linux and Apple have both matured to the point that I'm quite comfortable quietly evangelizing and building others up, regardless of the OS choice. It's time to relax guys, we finally have an atmosphere with the freedom to pick your own OS and to be happy with it. This is a GOOD time to be a nerd, and a fantastic time to share that passion and excitement with people from whatever background. Besides, if there's someone to demonize, it's the people that don't take the time to secure their boxes. Those come from all distros/OS's and I'll gladly pass the pitchfork around for them!

Create 17y ago
The issue was not exclusion, nor bashing. The code has been accepted by a driver maintainer, and there were surprisingly few critical undertone mails on lkml, however legitimate (namely, adherence to the Linux coding conventions). What is not pointless is honesty, and not even Linus[1] can say, that the code drop was honest. Microsoft should have said: somebody found us in violation of the license we think is important [the licensing legalese itself, not the GPL], and this is how we fixed it. Sorry for our mistake, we do our best. This is not what happened: instead it was sold as an act of benevolence. Voleurs. You cannot blame people for hating dishonest legal persons. [1] should take a long look in the mirror and ask themselves why they are being so hypocritical.
- fatdog789 17y ago
  Except that's not what happened. MS didn't "get caught" for a GPL violation -- there was no license requiring them to submit the code. They didn't do it out of the goodness of their hearts, correct, because MS is a corporation -- not a person. MS did this out of business sense -- increased interoperability with Linux just makes Windows/Microsoft all the more valuable.
  - Create 17y ago
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/23/microsoft_open_source_science/print.html http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/23/microsoft_open_sourc... Despite not being natural persons, corporations are recognized by the law to have rights and responsibilities like actual people. Corporations can exercise human rights against real individuals and the state http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation Yeager said Stanford's lawyers asked him to review a copy of Cisco's software. He found his own work in it. Stanford officials in charge of licensing debated what to do. ``Cisco mess'' was the heading of one e-mail discussing the issue. Earnest urged a lawsuit and even raised the idea of criminal charges against Bosack. He e-mailed colleagues: ``The fundamental problem is: how do you negotiate an equitable agreement with crooks?'' http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2001-December/007210.html http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2001-December/007210.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish
    - fatdog789 17y ago
      Your response in no way addresses what I said -- MS didn't act out of empathy, b/c corporations have none -- they don't have a "heart" b/c they are persons only by law. As to the Cisco cite -- how is that relevant to MS? Moreover, copying software code is not a criminal offense -- it's a civil tort. Finally, equitable estoppel is not a matter of negotiation, it's a matter of one party's unilateral acts.
      - Create 17y ago
bitdiddle 17y ago
If one looks at a graph of MS stock from 1986-2000 and compares that to 2000-2009 it shows the stock has basically languished. MS is a cash cow, slowly dying. They were the first and perhaps only company ever able to successfully leverage large network effects and create a proprietary lock-in model that has enabled them to dominate the desktop for a long time. Moreover it's so dominant that the only thing now worse than Office is Google Docs :) Their business practices, particularly with respect to extortionary illegal contracts with hardware manufacturers were only finally stopped with a government anti-trust suit against them. Although it may be enticing to spend a few years with a slick point and click IDE such as VisualStudio and pretend you are programming, as anyone who has ever done so knows at some point you run into something broken and it's tough shit because you can't fix it. But you can relax, you are correct. They were never able to "own" the net and they don't own the pipes (which I've read is the real reason Buffett never invested in MSFT, he's a very long investor). Please don't think ill of those who lived through those years. About three years ago now I swore off windoze for good and my health has improved considerably. I truly hope others have that same opportunity. I might be early, I often am, but if you have the stomach for it I'd say MSFT is a good short, even if you like the stock it can be just as profitable on the way down as it was for those on the way up :)
- Tarks 17y ago
  "Although it may be enticing to spend a few years with a slick point and click IDE such as VisualStudio and pretend you are programming, as anyone who has ever done so knows at some point you run into something broken and it's tough shit because you can't fix it." Really? Pretend? Really? That's what you think? I hope what you mean is the potential for over-reliance on wizards, which is easily countered by, oh, I don't know, learning what they're doing so you can accomplish it on your own, just 20-100x slower. Then use the wizard. I'm sorry to respond to flamebait but I use visualStudio and emacs, compile by pressing a button and using make. As long as you understand what's going on it's all good. I also think it's strange that in the Linux community there seems to be such a negative vibe around anything that even slightly raises the level of abstraction on the "tooling" side, yet on the languages side it's mostly a good thing, in my eyes they're both just tools, as long as understanding is sound then bring on the productivity boosts, again IMHO.

by spkthed 17y ago

Create 17y ago

The issue was not exclusion, nor bashing. The code has been accepted by a driver maintainer, and there were surprisingly few critical undertone mails on lkml, however legitimate (namely, adherence to the Linux coding conventions). What is not pointless is honesty, and not even Linus[1] can say, that the code drop was honest. Microsoft should have said: somebody found us in violation of the license we think is important [the licensing legalese itself, not the GPL], and this is how we fixed it. Sorry for our mistake, we do our best. This is not what happened: instead it was sold as an act of benevolence. Voleurs. You cannot blame people for hating dishonest legal persons. [1] should take a long look in the mirror and ask themselves why they are being so hypocritical.

fatdog789 17y ago
Except that's not what happened. MS didn't "get caught" for a GPL violation -- there was no license requiring them to submit the code. They didn't do it out of the goodness of their hearts, correct, because MS is a corporation -- not a person. MS did this out of business sense -- increased interoperability with Linux just makes Windows/Microsoft all the more valuable.
- Create 17y ago
  http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/23/microsoft_open_source_science/print.html http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/23/microsoft_open_sourc... Despite not being natural persons, corporations are recognized by the law to have rights and responsibilities like actual people. Corporations can exercise human rights against real individuals and the state http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation Yeager said Stanford's lawyers asked him to review a copy of Cisco's software. He found his own work in it. Stanford officials in charge of licensing debated what to do. ``Cisco mess'' was the heading of one e-mail discussing the issue. Earnest urged a lawsuit and even raised the idea of criminal charges against Bosack. He e-mailed colleagues: ``The fundamental problem is: how do you negotiate an equitable agreement with crooks?'' http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2001-December/007210.html http://www.xent.com/pipermail/fork/2001-December/007210.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace,_extend_and_extinguish
  - fatdog789 17y ago
    Your response in no way addresses what I said -- MS didn't act out of empathy, b/c corporations have none -- they don't have a "heart" b/c they are persons only by law. As to the Cisco cite -- how is that relevant to MS? Moreover, copying software code is not a criminal offense -- it's a civil tort. Finally, equitable estoppel is not a matter of negotiation, it's a matter of one party's unilateral acts.
    - Create 17y ago

bitdiddle 17y ago

If one looks at a graph of MS stock from 1986-2000 and compares that to 2000-2009 it shows the stock has basically languished. MS is a cash cow, slowly dying. They were the first and perhaps only company ever able to successfully leverage large network effects and create a proprietary lock-in model that has enabled them to dominate the desktop for a long time. Moreover it's so dominant that the only thing now worse than Office is Google Docs :) Their business practices, particularly with respect to extortionary illegal contracts with hardware manufacturers were only finally stopped with a government anti-trust suit against them. Although it may be enticing to spend a few years with a slick point and click IDE such as VisualStudio and pretend you are programming, as anyone who has ever done so knows at some point you run into something broken and it's tough shit because you can't fix it. But you can relax, you are correct. They were never able to "own" the net and they don't own the pipes (which I've read is the real reason Buffett never invested in MSFT, he's a very long investor). Please don't think ill of those who lived through those years. About three years ago now I swore off windoze for good and my health has improved considerably. I truly hope others have that same opportunity. I might be early, I often am, but if you have the stomach for it I'd say MSFT is a good short, even if you like the stock it can be just as profitable on the way down as it was for those on the way up :)

Tarks 17y ago
"Although it may be enticing to spend a few years with a slick point and click IDE such as VisualStudio and pretend you are programming, as anyone who has ever done so knows at some point you run into something broken and it's tough shit because you can't fix it." Really? Pretend? Really? That's what you think? I hope what you mean is the potential for over-reliance on wizards, which is easily countered by, oh, I don't know, learning what they're doing so you can accomplish it on your own, just 20-100x slower. Then use the wizard. I'm sorry to respond to flamebait but I use visualStudio and emacs, compile by pressing a button and using make. As long as you understand what's going on it's all good. I also think it's strange that in the Linux community there seems to be such a negative vibe around anything that even slightly raises the level of abstraction on the "tooling" side, yet on the languages side it's mostly a good thing, in my eyes they're both just tools, as long as understanding is sound then bring on the productivity boosts, again IMHO.