5 ms·

I can't believe this is a serious comment. The majority of open source is crap, like 80% of it. People build what they need and forget about it. Often the code

by ta12345 10y ago

I can't believe this is a serious comment. The majority of open source is crap, like 80% of it. People build what they need and forget about it. Often the code has no cohesion to the rest of the project and often it is of poor quality. Not to mention the ego's and lack of sociability of most projects. Apple didn't become the most valuable company by following that principle. Instead it took the approach of an egotistical maniac who demanded perfection and required that all the pieces fit together as part of an elegant puzzle. No small feat and not really replicated today -- except for Tesla and SpaceX. If I'm missing something, please name one other company today has has a "hit" product that unanimously loved (aka has insane sales and really high ratings) to the extent of the iPod, iPhone, Model S, etc.. Furthermore, I'd challenge you to name one open source project that can be shipped AS-IS as a product. Don't even say the Linux kernel, that has like what 2% market share? No doubt the majority of HN folks are sharp but there is a huge lack of emotional intelligence. I've found this at many tech companies except Apple. Even when talking with Apple engineers I find myself talking to another HUMAN who happens to appreciate technology and understands it isn't the be all end all. Its sad to see such a company lose it soul but it was inevitable. Disclaimer: I'm a kernel developer and contributor.

throwaway123dse 10y ago
> Instead it took the approach of an egotistical maniac who demanded perfection and required that all the pieces fit together as part of an elegant puzzle. No small feat and not really replicated today -- except for Tesla and SpaceX. Off topic, but Tesla and SpaceX are definitely not "egotistical maniac who demanded perfection and required that all the pieces fit together as part of an elegant puzzle"
MaxfordAndSons 10y ago
> Furthermore, I'd challenge you to name one open source project that can be shipped AS-IS as a product. Don't even say the Linux kernel, that has like what 2% market share? GitLab. Postgres. Atom. Docker (debatable). I could go on, but to be fair I am a bit of a hoarder of interesting oss. Re the Linux kernel: isn't it way higher than 2% if you count commercial and industrial usage? Also Android devices.
- LaSombra 10y ago
  WildFly, Apache httpd and Tomcat, git, Mercurial, LibreOffice for most cases, Darktable, Hexchat, Pidgin and the list goes on and on :)
- BoorishBears 10y ago
  Calling Android devices Linux is not productive.
  - ovao 10y ago
    He was referring specifically to Android's use of the Linux kernel. He was not calling Android "Linux", though I think doing so would be fair in a general sense.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  I could have an Android device using another kernel and the majority of PlayStore apps wouldn't notice. For the NDK ones, using the set of official APIs would be also enough. The only ones that would fail, would be the ones that try to bend the rules of official APIs.
geon 10y ago
> Don't even say the Linux kernel, that has like what 2% market share? 87% on mobile. Surely majority on servers. Lots in routers etc. I don't reslly see your point, though. If something is available for free, obviously it won't sell a lot. If that must be your definition of success, it seems you just have a preconcieved notion. Also, ovviously 99 % of all open source is garbage. But who cares? No one is forcing me to use it all.
- pjmlp 10y ago
  > 87% on mobile. Using Java and a subset of POSIX APIs that make it irrelevant which kernel Android is actually using, to anyone but driver writers. Google likes this so much that Brillo has even less layers and Fuchsia is being built with their own inhouse micro-kernel.
michaelmrose 10y ago
Most of everything is crap including user contributed comments, fitness to be shipped as someones product is a bizarrely narrow criterion for fitness, and emotional intelligence is a nebulous term with little meaning and less relevance.
groovy2shoes 10y ago
Well, then open source is well above average, seeing as 90% of everything is crap.[0] [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law
vacri 10y ago
> Don't even say the Linux kernel, that has like what 2% market share? How are you a kernel developer and then go on to only count desktop and laptop installs? Linux installs dwarf the other major kernels. Not big on desktop, but big on servers, embedded, and mobile.
vetinari 10y ago
If 80% of open source is crap, that's very good. 99% of closed source is crap too, so open source has better stats then. You might be interested in fact, that even Model S runs on Linux kernel ;)

by ta12345 10y ago

throwaway123dse 10y ago

> Instead it took the approach of an egotistical maniac who demanded perfection and required that all the pieces fit together as part of an elegant puzzle. No small feat and not really replicated today -- except for Tesla and SpaceX. Off topic, but Tesla and SpaceX are definitely not "egotistical maniac who demanded perfection and required that all the pieces fit together as part of an elegant puzzle"

MaxfordAndSons 10y ago

> Furthermore, I'd challenge you to name one open source project that can be shipped AS-IS as a product. Don't even say the Linux kernel, that has like what 2% market share? GitLab. Postgres. Atom. Docker (debatable). I could go on, but to be fair I am a bit of a hoarder of interesting oss. Re the Linux kernel: isn't it way higher than 2% if you count commercial and industrial usage? Also Android devices.

LaSombra 10y ago
WildFly, Apache httpd and Tomcat, git, Mercurial, LibreOffice for most cases, Darktable, Hexchat, Pidgin and the list goes on and on :)
BoorishBears 10y ago
Calling Android devices Linux is not productive.
- ovao 10y ago
  He was referring specifically to Android's use of the Linux kernel. He was not calling Android "Linux", though I think doing so would be fair in a general sense.
pjmlp 10y ago
I could have an Android device using another kernel and the majority of PlayStore apps wouldn't notice. For the NDK ones, using the set of official APIs would be also enough. The only ones that would fail, would be the ones that try to bend the rules of official APIs.

geon 10y ago

> Don't even say the Linux kernel, that has like what 2% market share? 87% on mobile. Surely majority on servers. Lots in routers etc. I don't reslly see your point, though. If something is available for free, obviously it won't sell a lot. If that must be your definition of success, it seems you just have a preconcieved notion. Also, ovviously 99 % of all open source is garbage. But who cares? No one is forcing me to use it all.

pjmlp 10y ago
> 87% on mobile. Using Java and a subset of POSIX APIs that make it irrelevant which kernel Android is actually using, to anyone but driver writers. Google likes this so much that Brillo has even less layers and Fuchsia is being built with their own inhouse micro-kernel.

michaelmrose 10y ago

Most of everything is crap including user contributed comments, fitness to be shipped as someones product is a bizarrely narrow criterion for fitness, and emotional intelligence is a nebulous term with little meaning and less relevance.

groovy2shoes 10y ago

Well, then open source is well above average, seeing as 90% of everything is crap.[0] [0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon%27s_law

vacri 10y ago

> Don't even say the Linux kernel, that has like what 2% market share? How are you a kernel developer and then go on to only count desktop and laptop installs? Linux installs dwarf the other major kernels. Not big on desktop, but big on servers, embedded, and mobile.

vetinari 10y ago

If 80% of open source is crap, that's very good. 99% of closed source is crap too, so open source has better stats then. You might be interested in fact, that even Model S runs on Linux kernel ;)