Linux vs. Windows: The Rematch

PC World ^ | 1 October, 2002 | Scott Spanbauer

[Bush2000]

Sort of like amatuer radio operator (HAMs) who invented, developed and created the basis for CELL TELEPHONY using repeaters. They didn't get paid for it, yet they put countless hours into it. Why ? Maybe they (HAMs) were motivated by pride and genuine interest. Maybe many in the Open Source community are likewise motivated.

I agree with you. And, frankly, I admire people who take personal time to contribute to their community. My comments were in response to Dominic Harr's bogus assertion that open source developers reflect Ayn Rand's capitalist theories involving selfishness and self-motivated greed. Nothing could be further from the truth.

[Dominic Harr]

My comments were in response to Dominic Harr's bogus assertion that open source developers reflect Ayn Rand's capitalist theories involving selfishness and self-motivated greed.

Every single open-source developer questioned has *confirmed* the point that they aren't doing it "for the community".

You've been soundly proven wrong. Refusing to *admit* you were wrong doesn't == you being right.

:-D

[Dominic Harr]

I agree with this 100%. I get paid well to be a programmer and I enjoy my job. I also occasionally do coding as a hobby for free. I love this too.

Would you say that there are compensations for doing OS work? Education/experience/training, source-code, etc? Compensations that do indeed earn you more money for your family?

And that this is the main reason you contribute?

It seems clear. OS is the "Galt's Gulch" of the 21st century.

[Bush2000]

It seems clear. OS is the "Galt's Gulch" of the 21st century.

If you're going to draw such BS distinctions, then you'll also have to throw in all MS OS developers, as well, since they also do work for their own experience/education/training.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

In other words, the overwhelming majority will never see any compensation for what they do.

You have a habit of thinking of compensation only in terms of money.  Do you think me uncompensated because I'm heavily involved in the BSA as a volunteer?  No, I'm richly compensated in ways that mere money could never do.  Do not belittle altruism in others because you don't see the use of it in your own life.  Self interest quite often has cravings that money can't satisfy.

[Crispy]

"Would you say that there are compensations for doing OS work? Education/experience/training, source-code, etc? Compensations that do indeed earn you more money for your family?"

Absolutely. I think what I have learned developing OS software has helped me find better solutions for the projects I do at work. I have been getting 10-15% yearly raises for the past 6 years, not counting this year. Everyone got the shaft where I work this year.

[Dominic Harr]

You either show at least ONE open-source developer doing it "for the community", or you're proven wrong.

It's that simple.

Open-source developers do it for personal gain, for personal reasons.

The 'compensation' is just different.

[Dominic Harr]

Self interest quite often has cravings that money can't satisfy.

Beautifully put.

This is a very fascinating concept, I think.

Open-source dev is the "Galt's Gulch" of the 21st century.

[Crispy]

"Umm, most OS developers either have a 9-5 job or are in school still. Others get paid to do it by Distributors or Corporations. Some of the Mozilla developers are getting paid by Netscape.

In other words, the overwhelming majority will never see any compensation for what they do."

Depends on how you define compensation.

[Dominic Harr]

I think what I have learned developing OS software has helped me find better solutions for the projects I do at work.

I know for certain that my OS work has helped me with my 'day' job. I've used patterns, techniques and even some actual code snippets I learned from the OS work in my 'real' work on many occasions.

It's the main reason I pay so much attention to OS.

[Northeast]

I'm coming late to this debate, but there was an intriguing discussion on the first page of this thread I'd like to chime in on.

With regards to the GUI argument, etc:

The lack of standardization in the interface, basic toolset, etc in Linux I think may be the largest contributing factor to its position in the market. Think of all the areas this impacts?

Everthing from the user moving from one machine to another and having that "familiar feel", to 3rd parties that might like to offer software but are put off by the service and support nightmare from end users. Granted this argument is stronger for the "home" user than it is for the standardizing corporation with a dedicated IT group and training dollars. But when Mary Marketeer and Andy the Accountant go home, they'll be firing up Windows for the kids.

Now, I use my machine for lots of things, among them playing some great games, video editing, photo editing, etc. Yes, I realize there are things like WinX out there as well as a bunch of other solutions to run Windows inside Linux (adding another layer of complexity to the whole situation), but just imagine a support call to a 3rd party software developer! What distribution are you on, what GUI, etc etc. The support costs for launching a product into that market make it prohibitive because of the uncertanty of the environment.

So while I understand the independence of the Linux community, and the "do what you like" flexibility of the OS, the inability to standardize the face of the OS to the user is probably the biggest obstacle it faces right now on the desktop, IMHO.

I personally like the SuSE distribution, and have it running on secondary machines after having tried RedHat and Mandrake. But my main machine will stay WinXP.

None of this is meant as a slap at the penguins, just my thoughts on the matter.

Regards

[Campion]

You have to recompile the kernal to bring in support for new systems, or you can power down using the power switch!

You should recompile the kernel to match your configuration anyway. Otherwise, you're just using some Swiss Army knife thing that the distribution authors thought would boot up and mostly work on the largest possible number of machines.

Incidentally, the decision about how to configure those "default install" kernels that come with the distribution is made by the authors of the distribution, not by anyone involved with the kernel.

[Bush2000]

Open-source dev is the "Galt's Gulch" of the 21st century.

Thanks, Josef Stalin. You repeat the lie so many times it takes on its own reality.

[Bush2000]

You should recompile the kernel to match your configuration anyway.

Plus, everybody's Mom loves recompiling the kernel ... ;-p

[Bush2000]

It's the main reason I pay so much attention to OS.

Which OS do you use on a daily basis?

[usconservative]

The real competitive victim of Linux is not MS, but Sun. I can't see why an 'average' user would switch their desktop over to Linux from Windows at this point, but for someone experienced with Solaris, Unix, et al, Linux is a snap.

Exactly right. Linux on a cheap, high-end Intel clone is displacing the Sun/HP/SGI (are there any of those left?) workstations. Linux is also displacing the low end Unix market, specifically the single & dual processor servers.

Linux w/Apache has huge support in the Webserver market already. Linux's ability to run .NET is going to eat away at Microsoft's WebService/Office Integration initiatives. It'll happen slowly, but it'll happen.