The Convenient Fiction of Distributions, Dec 01, 2007

I am increasingly convinced all of the arguments between Linux distributions are going to become moot very soon. If they aren't there already.

I was taking a walk with my wife the other day, talking about all the kooky-nuttiness that is the Linux and Open Source world sometimes. I think I was harping on a certain company in Washington State and their recent "attempts" to "open source" some of their code.

For quite a few pundits out there, the fact that there are so many Linux distributions is a bit troubling to them. I am not sure why this argument keeps coming up, but it goes something like this: there are X Linux distros out there, which is too many to choose from for users, and creates a strain on developer resources.

I apologize for the cliches, but this illustrates several principals: if you grasp too tightly, you will lose. If you give, you will get. Creativity and genuine invention can't be controlled; they need a fertile, free ecosystem.

... the best argument can be made: "when Person on the Street can use Linux out of the box, then Linux will be mainstream."

If you are a Linux user with one of these cards, unless your software can work with this DRM protection scheme, you won't be able to enjoy the full benefits of HD content.

Boy, there's nothing like sitting down to your computer with a nice cup of tea, opening your browser and finding out that you're "morally bankrupt." Oh, sorry, my mistake. That's Red Hat and "a number of other Linux distros." I'm part of the "technical media who ignores the fact that your freedoms go down the tank by making these compromises."

If you are a LUG and are contemplating holding a regional show, such as SCALE, the Ohio LinuxFest, or NorthwestFest, I urge you to examine the benefits of these shows and others like them. I believe in the long run they will be very advantageous for the Linux operating system.

Linus then went on to explain how, in his view, OSDL functions.

"No, you should think of OSDL as two different kinds of entities (and first off, you should realize that I do not officially speak "for" OSDL in any form what-so-ever--I'm a developer, and that, and only that, is my job):

"A go-between and contact point for different companies. Neutral ground, in other words, for companies to try to figure out what their common needs are, and how to document them as a guide for developers. This is the side of OSDL that does things like the DCL drafts, but it also ends up doing a lot of "unofficial" networking between companies that all have slightly different needs and wishes. And that's the side that I'm not really affiliated with, although it's useful to me too: the documents end up being a somewhat more organized way of knowing what different people end up actually wanting.

SCO wants Linux to succeed. The more Linux succeeds, the more valuable it becomes. While some have derided McBride and Co. as a bunch of liars, I will point out that they have told the truth about at least one thing: they are not trying to harm Linux. Why should they? If SCO can prove the Linux kernel has unauthorized pieces of SCO's code, they believe they will have control of a technology that has the capability to take on and even beat Microsoft.

Names in the Linux community are very important, too. It's GNOME, not Gnome. It's the K Desktop Environment, not the KDE Desktop Environment. SUSE as opposed to SuSE. Red Hat Enterprise Linux or Fedora Core instead of Red Hat Linux. There is even a very strong debate about what to call Linux. Linux is the kernel and GNU/Linux is the operating system, many will stipulate.

That, however, is a debate for another time and another place. What I wanted to bring up was a small trend amongst the commercial Linux companies to not use the Linux name at all in their branding--GNU or otherwise.

With its recent pronouncements about suing Linux customers and BSD, SCO's Darl McBride doesn't seem to be scoring very well in the good will department, judging from the reactions of Las Vegas showgoers.

McBride spelled out some of SCO's latest plans at least three times yesterday: in a press teleconference; a speech at Jupitermedia's Computer Digital Expo (CDE) in Las Vegas, and a press briefing just afterward.

Attendees at Comdex and Apache.Con--two other shows going on in Las Vegas this week--responded to the news with a mix of anger, frustration, bemusement, and concern.

Citizens Against Government Waste should be ashamed of itself. As a liberty-loving foe of intrusive government, I'm normally sympathetic to their crusade against bureaucracy and over-regulation. But today, CAGW made the strongest argument I've ever seen for writing them off as mere shills for corporate greed.

CAGW's press release attacking the Massachusetts Freeware Initiative reads like it was dictated by Microsoft's PR department--complete with a fraudalent assertion that open source is more expensive, and even an attempt to associate open source with the hideous evils of the Soviet Union and socialism.

Mr. McBride, in your "Open Letter to the Open Source Community" your offer to negotiate with us comes at the end of a farrago of falsehoods, half-truths, evasions, slanders, and misrepresentations. You must do better than this. We will not attempt to erect a compromise with you on a foundation of dishonesty.

"The idea that the GPL is contrary to copyright law is, to put it plainly, nonsense," says Eben Moglen, professor of law at Columbia University and general counsel of the Free Software Foundation. "The GPL is a simple form of copyright permission, entirely within the scope of the powers exclusively reserved to the copyright holder under the Act. Despite its unusual social consequences, the GPL is legally about as straightforward and uncontroversial an instrument as can be. Challenging it as 'contrary to copyright law' will fail, regardless of the degree of noise made."

IBM, three years into its embrace of Linux, will continue its evangelist effort this week by putting on display Unilever and several other new customers using the operating system.

Software titan Microsoft is taking a significant step toward appeasing the open source community by integrating its .NET Framework into the Apache Web server, the world's most popular back-end software for serving up Web pages.

“Turbolinux continues to do business as a privately held, global software company,” elaborated Turbolinux President and CEO Ly-thong Pham, in a written statement to Linux Today.

One of the great blessings we have in America (more and more) is freedom of choice. Sure there can be more but I believe we can proudly boast of our capacity to make choices, both good and bad without some system of government dictating a high degree of control over this. This reminds me of Linux.

On July 26th, I am going with a team of construction workers, doctors, nurses, and computer administrators to set up schools and clinics in Ghana, West Africa. I happen to be the lead administrator tasked with deciding the topology and OS configurations for these computer networks in these schools. However, I have a major dilemna: do I push Linux or Windows?

In the hearing on June 12th, the Landgericht Muenchen I court rejected the arguments of "Lés Editions Albert René," thus ending the year-long trademark battle that has been fought between an open source software company and a comic book publisher.

In its ruling, the court stated that the words "MobiliX" and "Obelix" can hardly be mixed up with each other. Also, the work of MobiliX is dedicated to another audience.