Larry McVoy wrote:
> The reason I take this point of view, unpopular though it may be,
> is that I see open source as basically parasitic.
Think of it as a child that's growing up. For quite a while, it
will just draw resources from the parents, add little work or
innovations, and will have considerably less economical power
than the parents.
You choose to view Open Source as a historical accident that
needs to be integrated into the traditional framework. I'd say
it is more like an evolution into an age where most of the
physical limitations of the sharing of information have
disappeared.
Regarding your statement that there is no innovation in Linux:
in the end, only the author can tell whether something is really
new or not. When I look back on my own projects, I find quite a
few things that weren't based on somebody else's blueprint. And
I'm sure it's the same for many other Linux developers too.
With plenty of companies establishing Linux as a platform for
migrating their current installed base to, it's just natural
that a lot of quite visible work is being put into duplicating
functionality found on legacy platforms.
That doesn't mean that innovation doesn't happen. It may just
be a bit harder to recognize on that big construction site.
- Werner
-- _________________________________________________________________________ / Werner Almesberger, Buenos Aires, Argentina wa@almesberger.net / /_http://www.almesberger.net/____________________________________________/ - 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/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jun 23 2003 - 22:00:32 EST