8 ms·

Linux is a kernel, not an OS, and Microsoft has been abjectly hostile to the OSes that use Linux and respect user freedoms. If they weren't, they would have ne

by zanny 10y ago

Linux is a kernel, not an OS, and Microsoft has been abjectly hostile to the OSes that use Linux and respect user freedoms. If they weren't, they would have never pushed hostile proprietary vendor lock in tech like DirectX12 or Universal Windows Platform in recent years.

paulddraper 10y ago
(1) That's hair splitting of common usage. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux "Linux was originally developed as a free operating system for personal computers based on the Intel x86 architecture" "Linux has the largest installed base of all general-purpose operating systems." "Linux is not the only such operating system" "Linux is also the leading operating system on servers and other big iron systems" I'm surprised you didn't distinguish it as an OS kernel, instead of leaving it ambiguous as to what kind of kernel it is, e.g. popcorn. (2) The opposite is true. For example, Ubuntu user-space (i.e. sans Linux kernel) is available on Windows.
- cyphar 10y ago
  > (1) That's hair splitting of common usage. The operating system's technical name is GNU/Linux[1]. Many people call it Linux incorrectly, but it is actually a serious distinction[2]. I would agree however that Linux is the most widely used OS kernel. To make the distinction more obvious, can you explain what the difference is between "Linux" and Android (which uses the Linux kernel). [ Hint: the difference is that Android doesn't contain GNU. ] [1]: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.en.html https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.en.html [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy
  - richardwhiuk 10y ago
    Linux is a class of operating systems which use the Linux kernel. Referring to Linux as an OS, is a perfectly fine thing to generically mean 'an OS which uses Linux as a kernel' and has an agreed common meaning. Almost no Operating System is precisely GNU/Linux - most have vim, an X server, GNOME or KDE, 7zip etc. And the argument that GNU is a more principal argument is incorrect.
    - bonzini 10y ago
      Uhm, you're saying GNOME, the GNU Network Object Model Environment, isn't GNU?
      - richardwhiuk 10y ago
        GNOME is developed by the GNOME project, which as far as I can tell isn't actually part of the FSF. I don't considered everything licensed under the GNU license, or formerly associated with the GNU project / FSF to be 'GNU'.
  - tn13 10y ago
    Even more hair splitting here. Your arguments would matter in court but in general I think it is fairly easy to understand what a user means when he says Linux. For example I say Android is based on Linux.
    - zanny 10y ago
      Except that is exactly the terminology fudging that makes the conversation opaque. Android uses a forked Linux kernel, and uses none of the GNU toolchain that appears on Linux distributions. Android is based on Linux, but not GNU/Linux, and if you use just Linux as an interchangeable term for both kernel and OS including user-space, you could have gotten away with that a decade ago, but today there are enough divergent systems using Linux and not the GNU system that the distinction is required to make sense.
      - inlineint 10y ago
        Android patches had been merged into upstream a few years ago [1], so its kernel is actually Linux now, not a fork. [1] https://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.3#head-b733d694037e0b34ad47e1b5d38ebc4d1bd1d89f https://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.3#head-b733d694037e0b34ad4...
  - bisby 10y ago
    Alpine doesn't use GNU by default. And it would fit into what I call "Linux". The "operating system" is not "technically" "GNU/Linux" - that's just what Richard Stallman wants it to be. Stallman wants the definition of "operating system" to be the fully usable system. In which case Linux won't work. You need GNU coreutils. But you need a lot of other things too, why are the other things omitted from the naming? Windows on the other hand is clearly an "operating system." Does this mean that the OS is "Ubuntu" or "Alpine"? Or are they just distributions still? In this case GNU/Linux is still not the OS. Dennis Ritchie once referred to the kernel as "the operating system proper", albeit when describing various parts of unix (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoVQTPbD6UY#t=1m28s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoVQTPbD6UY#t=1m28s). I think Ritchie's opinion is much more valid than Stallman's. [edit: this doesn't prove that the operating system is just the kernel, but that it's not far fetched to refer to the kernel as an operating system, or in that case to refer to an operating system by the kernel] The short of it is that when people say that Linux is an operating system, perhaps they mean "a family of operating systems based on the same kernel" but that's a mouthful. And since most people would include things like Alpine in there when they say "linux", they clearly arent just referring to GNU/Linux. Thats one of those things where "Windows 10" is a different version of "Windows" than "Windows 8" because the bundled user space is different... but theyre both "Windows". If something requires Windows 10, I can say "requires windows 10". If it just generically works on windows 3.11 until present, I can say "works on windwos". "Alpine" is a version of "Linux", and so is "Ubuntu". Ubuntu just also happens to fall under "GNU/Linux". If something requires GNU, i can say "requires Linux with GNU" and otherwise "requires Linux" is absolutely correct. If something requires a specific distro, then you can specify that, otherwise you go for the lowest common denominator. (a lot of things that "require linux" will work on unix/BSD too, but no one throws a fit over that). Also, the most important factor is that communication is about conveying thoughts effectively. If you understood "Linux" well enough to try to correct it, then you understood and thoughts are conveyed. That also means insisting on GNU/Linux for colloquial use is just pedantic.
    - jen20 10y ago
      Stallman's definition is correct. The operating system for everyone else includes the userland and libc. Luckily this is what made LX and the Windows equivalent possible, though.
  - AWildDHHAppears 10y ago
    That's Stallman's opinion. In reality, it's called what people call it.
tw04 10y ago
So Redhat is hostile towards Linux too then, right? Because if they weren't, they wouldn't push their competing products against Canonical or Suse. Just because companies release competing, incompatible products, doesn't mean they're "hostile" towards one another.
- afsina 10y ago
  Well, MS is still extorting money from android vendors using os related patents.
  - tw04 10y ago
    That's completely irrelevant. But "extorting" is more than a BIT of a stretch. They've got valid patents that Android handset makers need. Just like they need licensing to even put a cellular modem in the phone in the first place. If you honestly think Samsung would willingly hand over $10-15 per handset over bunk patents, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona you might be interested in.
    - afsina 10y ago
      Many of those patents are directly targeting Linux and all are BS. Samsung earns enough money so that they chose not to enter multi billion dollar gambit where law protects BS software patents.
      - tw04 10y ago
        A quick look at the list tells me you don't know what you're talking about. First one: using cell network and GPS for more accurate positioning. That has nothing to do with Linux or Android directly, and everything to do with ANY CELLPHONE.
        gribbly 10y ago
        Where is this list ?

by zanny 10y ago

paulddraper 10y ago

(1) That's hair splitting of common usage. Quoting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux "Linux was originally developed as a free operating system for personal computers based on the Intel x86 architecture" "Linux has the largest installed base of all general-purpose operating systems." "Linux is not the only such operating system" "Linux is also the leading operating system on servers and other big iron systems" I'm surprised you didn't distinguish it as an OS kernel, instead of leaving it ambiguous as to what kind of kernel it is, e.g. popcorn. (2) The opposite is true. For example, Ubuntu user-space (i.e. sans Linux kernel) is available on Windows.

cyphar 10y ago
> (1) That's hair splitting of common usage. The operating system's technical name is GNU/Linux[1]. Many people call it Linux incorrectly, but it is actually a serious distinction[2]. I would agree however that Linux is the most widely used OS kernel. To make the distinction more obvious, can you explain what the difference is between "Linux" and Android (which uses the Linux kernel). [ Hint: the difference is that Android doesn't contain GNU. ] [1]: https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.en.html https://www.gnu.org/gnu/linux-and-gnu.en.html [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU/Linux_naming_controversy
- richardwhiuk 10y ago
  Linux is a class of operating systems which use the Linux kernel. Referring to Linux as an OS, is a perfectly fine thing to generically mean 'an OS which uses Linux as a kernel' and has an agreed common meaning. Almost no Operating System is precisely GNU/Linux - most have vim, an X server, GNOME or KDE, 7zip etc. And the argument that GNU is a more principal argument is incorrect.
  - bonzini 10y ago
    Uhm, you're saying GNOME, the GNU Network Object Model Environment, isn't GNU?
    - richardwhiuk 10y ago
      GNOME is developed by the GNOME project, which as far as I can tell isn't actually part of the FSF. I don't considered everything licensed under the GNU license, or formerly associated with the GNU project / FSF to be 'GNU'.
- tn13 10y ago
  Even more hair splitting here. Your arguments would matter in court but in general I think it is fairly easy to understand what a user means when he says Linux. For example I say Android is based on Linux.
  - zanny 10y ago
    Except that is exactly the terminology fudging that makes the conversation opaque. Android uses a forked Linux kernel, and uses none of the GNU toolchain that appears on Linux distributions. Android is based on Linux, but not GNU/Linux, and if you use just Linux as an interchangeable term for both kernel and OS including user-space, you could have gotten away with that a decade ago, but today there are enough divergent systems using Linux and not the GNU system that the distinction is required to make sense.
    - inlineint 10y ago
      Android patches had been merged into upstream a few years ago [1], so its kernel is actually Linux now, not a fork. [1] https://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.3#head-b733d694037e0b34ad47e1b5d38ebc4d1bd1d89f https://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_3.3#head-b733d694037e0b34ad4...
- bisby 10y ago
  Alpine doesn't use GNU by default. And it would fit into what I call "Linux". The "operating system" is not "technically" "GNU/Linux" - that's just what Richard Stallman wants it to be. Stallman wants the definition of "operating system" to be the fully usable system. In which case Linux won't work. You need GNU coreutils. But you need a lot of other things too, why are the other things omitted from the naming? Windows on the other hand is clearly an "operating system." Does this mean that the OS is "Ubuntu" or "Alpine"? Or are they just distributions still? In this case GNU/Linux is still not the OS. Dennis Ritchie once referred to the kernel as "the operating system proper", albeit when describing various parts of unix (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoVQTPbD6UY#t=1m28s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoVQTPbD6UY#t=1m28s). I think Ritchie's opinion is much more valid than Stallman's. [edit: this doesn't prove that the operating system is just the kernel, but that it's not far fetched to refer to the kernel as an operating system, or in that case to refer to an operating system by the kernel] The short of it is that when people say that Linux is an operating system, perhaps they mean "a family of operating systems based on the same kernel" but that's a mouthful. And since most people would include things like Alpine in there when they say "linux", they clearly arent just referring to GNU/Linux. Thats one of those things where "Windows 10" is a different version of "Windows" than "Windows 8" because the bundled user space is different... but theyre both "Windows". If something requires Windows 10, I can say "requires windows 10". If it just generically works on windows 3.11 until present, I can say "works on windwos". "Alpine" is a version of "Linux", and so is "Ubuntu". Ubuntu just also happens to fall under "GNU/Linux". If something requires GNU, i can say "requires Linux with GNU" and otherwise "requires Linux" is absolutely correct. If something requires a specific distro, then you can specify that, otherwise you go for the lowest common denominator. (a lot of things that "require linux" will work on unix/BSD too, but no one throws a fit over that). Also, the most important factor is that communication is about conveying thoughts effectively. If you understood "Linux" well enough to try to correct it, then you understood and thoughts are conveyed. That also means insisting on GNU/Linux for colloquial use is just pedantic.
  - jen20 10y ago
    Stallman's definition is correct. The operating system for everyone else includes the userland and libc. Luckily this is what made LX and the Windows equivalent possible, though.
- AWildDHHAppears 10y ago
  That's Stallman's opinion. In reality, it's called what people call it.

tw04 10y ago

So Redhat is hostile towards Linux too then, right? Because if they weren't, they wouldn't push their competing products against Canonical or Suse. Just because companies release competing, incompatible products, doesn't mean they're "hostile" towards one another.

afsina 10y ago
Well, MS is still extorting money from android vendors using os related patents.
- tw04 10y ago
  That's completely irrelevant. But "extorting" is more than a BIT of a stretch. They've got valid patents that Android handset makers need. Just like they need licensing to even put a cellular modem in the phone in the first place. If you honestly think Samsung would willingly hand over $10-15 per handset over bunk patents, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona you might be interested in.
  - afsina 10y ago
    Many of those patents are directly targeting Linux and all are BS. Samsung earns enough money so that they chose not to enter multi billion dollar gambit where law protects BS software patents.
    - tw04 10y ago
      A quick look at the list tells me you don't know what you're talking about. First one: using cell network and GPS for more accurate positioning. That has nothing to do with Linux or Android directly, and everything to do with ANY CELLPHONE.
      - gribbly 10y ago
        Where is this list ?