Applications Management Engineer Sr (NYC) Next Step Systems US-NY-New York Post A Job | Post A Resume

"Linux can be made profitable and it can be made so without going the enterprise route or by relying on the traditional services an support model--as long as technology companies are willing to sell the operating system on their own highly optimized and performance enhanced proprietary hardware...

"Consider for the moment, the example set by Apple. True their Operating System is a proprietary fork of BSD and the MACH kernel, and not Linux, but consider the untold ramifications of their example purely from their position as a POSIX compliant *nix-like Operating System. I highly doubt that in the beginning Apple anticipated the wellspring of open-source and 'free' applications that have since flooded the Macintosh platform thanks to Apple's OS X. The head CEOs may have expected a few universities to port their favorite *nix utilities here and there, may even have anticipated that a few oddball *BSD loyalists would port over a few text editors or some disk utilities; certainly they likely imagined any such port to be command line only. The current reality today with the Macintosh being able to run just about any *BSD\'Linux' applications you could name (and most of these as GUI applications that run seamlessly blended into the background with Apple's native applications) would likely have floored them had they known..."

Complete Story

Related Stories:
The Register: MS to Eradicate GPL, Hence Linux(Jun 26, 2002)
ZDNet: Linux: Red Hat Should Just Stop Whining(Jun 11, 2002)
NewsForge: Commentary: Where UnitedLinux Got It Wrong(Jun 03, 2002)
NewsForge: Turbolinux's turnaround game plan: Closed-source products included (Oct 10, 2001)

Index Mode   |   Flat Mode   |   Thread Mode   |   Thread Flat     Talkback(s) Name  and Date   yes and no    wildpossum Jan 10, 2004, 10:13:03     Some very good points    Henry Story Jan 10, 2004, 10:27:44     Problem with understanding GPL un Linux principles    Peteris Krisjanis Jan 10, 2004, 11:23:46     Out of date, by over a decade    Noah F. San Tsorbutz Jan 10, 2004, 13:48:19     ???    Charles Hixson Jan 10, 2004, 14:03:50     still a naive text    michel Jan 10, 2004, 14:04:41     X Interface    Ted Appleby Jan 10, 2004, 14:22:36     Re: Problem with understanding GPL un Linux princi    Jeff Cobb Jan 10, 2004, 16:13:22     Oh Man...    Oh man Jan 10, 2004, 17:17:18     simplistic and dangerous view    OMG Jan 10, 2004, 17:19:46     Multiple platforms - Linux one of them    Mario Miyojim Jan 10, 2004, 17:24:10     binary drivers?    einstein Jan 10, 2004, 18:08:51     D.D. Chamberlain    copy_chief Jan 10, 2004, 22:18:46     Linux Proprietary    GH Jan 11, 2004, 01:42:36     Re: Some very good points    Rainer Weikusat Jan 11, 2004, 06:47:22     Re: Linux Proprietary    Henry Story Jan 11, 2004, 11:44:54     nice try...    anonymous Jan 11, 2004, 19:06:33     GPL underestimate have too narrow perspective    Juha Jan 12, 2004, 07:00:32     Re: Re: Linux Proprietary    Rainer Weikusat Jan 12, 2004, 08:05:19     this is wrong with nvidia closed source drivers    aRTee Jan 12, 2004, 09:24:12     Home | Search Talkbacks | Customize View    Top of Page   Enter your comments below: * Your Name: * Your Email Address: * Subject: CC: [will also send this talkback to an E-Mail address] * Comments: Tags allowed:<I>,<B> and <U>. See our talkback-policy for more about talkback content. Fields marked with * are required!