From: joe briggs <jbriggs@briggsmedia.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Fwd: Re: [OT] Re: Troll Tech [was Re: Sco vs. IBM]
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 2003 07:56:48 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200306220756.48917.jbriggs@briggsmedia.com> (raw)
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: Re: [OT] Re: Troll Tech [was Re: Sco vs. IBM]
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 19:46:04 -0700
From: Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
To: Joe Briggs <jbriggs@briggsmedia.com>
Cc: Frank Cusack <fcusack@fcusack.com>, Larry McVoy <lm@bitmover.com>
In five years of talking about this topic, I think this is the most
intelligent and thoughtful reply I've ever seen. Kudos.
I'd suggest you post it to the list, it makes sense to me. A lot of
sense. And I, for one, hadn't really thought of it like this before.
Thanks for the mail.
--lm
On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 09:59:05PM -0400, Joe Briggs wrote:
> Linux is a liberator for applications developers. Maybe Linux is an
> exercise in OS re-implementation, but the _existance_ of an accessable
> development and delployment platform is what enabled applications
> developers for M$ in the mid-90's, and what is enabling those with ideas,
> business plans, and innovation in todays capital-short market. Before the
> artist can paint, he (she) needs a canvas. Linux is the canvas.
>
> On Friday 20 June 2003 08:04 pm, Frank Cusack wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 07:24:36AM -0700, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > > I've said for years that the open source world is all about
> > > reimplementing and not about new innovation.
> >
> > Almost spot-on.
> >
> > Where it's off is
> >
> > - It's not ALL about reimplenting. Didn't Solaris' prstat come AFTER
> > top? Anyway I'm sure there are lots of examples here, maybe not LARGE
> > pieces of code (although I'll point to TeX since every exception needs an
> > exception as well), but I think you discount open source innovation too
> > much. All of the ATTENTION is on the bits that are reimplementations
> > because that's how mass markets work.
> >
> > - Just because two people independenty implement something doesn't mean
> > one of them is REimplementing.
> >
> > Isn't bk simply a reimplementation of p4 by your argument?
> >
> > /fc
> >
> > -
> > 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/
>
> --
> Joe Briggs
> Briggs Media Systems
> 105 Burnsen Ave.
> Manchester NH 03104 USA
> TEL/FAX 603 232 3115
> www.briggsmedia.com
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com
http://www.bitmover.com/lm
-------------------------------------------------------
--
Joe Briggs
Briggs Media Systems
105 Burnsen Ave.
Manchester NH 01304 USA
TEL 603-232-3115 FAX 603-625-5809 MOBILE 603-493-2386
www.briggsmedia.com
reply other threads:[~2003-06-22 10:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200306220756.48917.jbriggs@briggsmedia.com \
--to=jbriggs@briggsmedia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®