On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:48:04 +0000, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>____/ John B. slocomb on Thursday 19 February 2009 14:24 : \____
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 14:55:31 +0100, J G Miller <miller@xxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 19 Feb 2009 19:42:18 +0700, John B. slocomb wrote:
>>> > of course Linux was, originally, basically a copied Unix kernel.
>>>
>>>This fallacy raises its ugly head once again.
>>>
>>>So the Linux kernel which copied from which Unix kernel?
>>
>>
>> What do you call a system that apes not only the look and feel of
>> another system but is so close to it in function that the Unix gnu
>> utilities worked with it, if not a copy?
>>
>> This isn't to say that the source is a direct copy but certainly the
>> earlier forms of Linux were similar enough to Unix that the parentage
>> certainly was apparent.
>>
>> IN fact, here is a quote from Linus:
>>
>> Linus wrote in comp.os.minux (1991)
>>
>> "Do you pine for the nice days of Minux 1.1, when men were men and
>> wrote their own device drivers? Are you without a nice project and
>> just dying to cut your teeth on a OS you can try to modify for your
>> needs? Are you finding it frustrating when everything works on Minux?
>> No more all-nighters to get a nifty program working? This post might
>> be just for you.
>>
>> "As I mentioned a month ago, I'm working on a free version of
>> Minix-lookalike for AT-386 computers. It has finally reached the stage
>> where it's even usable (though may not be depending on what you want),
>> and I am willing to put out the sources for wider distribution. It is
>> just version 0.02... but I've successfully run bash, gcc, gnu-make,
>> gnu-sed, compress, etc. under it."
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John B.
>> (jbslocombatgmaildotcom)
>
>By the same logic, accuse Apple and Microsoft (Mac OS and Windows) of
>being "basically a copied Xerox".
>
>Ideas are everywhere. Those who don't use preconceived knowledge go nowhere.
>The best scientists work this way too.
>
>"If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants," Sir
>Isaac Newton (1642-1727)
Certainly! And I don't remember anyone ever contesting the fact that
the mouse input devise and the graphical user interface concept
originated with the Xerox labs innovations.
Which is what makes me wonder about people that appear to be arguing
that Linus created an entirely new and original system. He didn't and
certainly he never claimed that he did.
In fact that Linux was built on the foundation of a previous
successful system is simply "good engineering". Nobody that is
competent sets out to design anything without researching the
literature to see what has been built before and what problems were
encounter. Only after you know what has gone before can you really
build something "better".
Rather then be so defensive about Linux I would have thought people
would be bragging about this system, created by an unknown
under-graduate, in an unknown school, that has become an
internationally recognized and accepted system, even making inroads,
in some instances, into what was in the past the sole domain of the
largest software company in the world.
Cheers,
John B.
(jbslocombatgmaildotcom)
|
|
