SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
ZDNet reports that from supercomputers to stock markets to smartphones, Linux dominates most computing markets, but Linus Torvalds still wants Linux to rule on one place it doesn't: The desktop. "The challenge on the desktop is not a kernel problem. It's a whole infrastructure problem. I think we'll get there one day," said Torvalds at the LinuxCon Convention in Chicago. "Year of the Linux desktop?" asked Kroah-Hartman. "I'm not going there," replied Torvalds with a smile.
Torvalds also discussed the issue of kernel code bloat as Linux is now being run in small-form-factor embedded devices. "We've been bloating the kernel over the last 20 years, but hardware has grown faster," Torvalds said. Torvalds wants to push the envelope for the embedded market despite some challenges. He noted that some of the small-form-factor device vendors have their own operating system technologies in place already, and those vendors don't always make hardware readily available to Linux kernel developers.
The issue of Linux code maintainers was another hot-button topic addressed by Torvalds, who noted that some Linux kernel code has only a single maintainer and that can mean trouble when that maintainer wants to take time off. Torvalds said that a good setup that is now used by the x86 maintainers is to have multiple people maintaining the code. It's an approach that ARM Linux developers have recently embraced, as well. "When I used to do ARM merges, I wanted to shoot myself and take a few ARM developers with me," Torvalds said. "It's now much less painful and ARM developers are picking up the multiple maintainer approach."
(Score: 4, Interesting) by E_NOENT on Friday August 22 2014, @11:09AM
One the one hand: Yay Linux everywhere...
On the other hand, let's look at what this really means:
The main driver for this is Google, who's using a Linux kernel on its devices (Android, Chromebook, etc.). These devices are generally locked-down and proprietary, and what's worse, they contain privacy destroying anti-features.
I guess if the goal is to "put Linux everywhere" maybe we're winning, but in terms of user freedom, could it be that we're losing?
I'm not in the business... I *am* the business.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 22 2014, @11:20AM
Another Google Hater, I see. Well, I understand where you're coming from. But all in all, Google's mission is to collect data. And they have achieved that goal. All data that they collect is given back to you. Their mission is great, and you should support what they're actually doing. They are making the world a better place, by making linux easier to use, and winning in basically all markets. And anyway. Chrome OS is open source, Android is open source, all their linux based stuff is completely useful in every way. Forks exist for that specific reason.
(Score: 2) by everdred on Friday August 22 2014, @05:31PM
> They are making the world a better place, by making linux easier to use, and winning in basically all markets. And anyway. Chrome OS is open source, Android is open source, all their linux based stuff is completely useful in every way. Forks exist for that specific reason.
(I'd mod you up if I could, but I guess I'll respond and hopefully amplify the point you're making.)
Yes, this exactly. Google has the resources that they could have done Android and Chrome OS proprietary down to the core, but didn't. Of course these open source products, as they distribute them, are designed to connect to proprietary services, collect data, make money and show ads. But in the Android world, you can replace all the preloaded Google applications (right down to the home screen/app launcher) with third-party solutions, sideload apps, and even add another "app store" to your device without needing to rooting it. And of course, rooting opens up a whole 'nother world of possibilities.
I bought the original Android phone because it was clear from the start that Google was doing The Right Thing, and for the first year or so, it was a pretty lonely camp to be in. Today, when I see headlines about Android market share, I sometimes can't believe that the mostly-good-guy is actually winning in the market.
(Score: 2) by jasassin on Friday August 22 2014, @04:23PM
All the code they modify/add is released because the code is GPL. Does it matter who writes code if it is a solution to a problem, and everyone can use it? Long live GPL!
jasassin@gmail.com GPG Key ID: 0xE6462C68A9A3DB5A
(Score: 2) by cykros on Sunday August 24 2014, @08:01PM
It's mostly not Linux power users that are losing freedom with these anti-features, because, well, we root our devices and then proceed to root them out (or, in the case of Chromebooks anyway, often just replace ChromeOS with another flavor of Linux). As for the users migrating from Windows...well, they're not really losing any freedom, and are at least usually gaining some. And the big key here is that they're pumping money that goes to developing things like hardware drivers. While that's less true with Android and Chrome, as they're generally running on devices that conventional Linux distributions just haven't put the legwork into supporting (this isn't a stab...it's a significant amount of legwork, especially when you're trying to use a touchscreen interface to handle applications that never were intended for use with a touchscreen), in the similar case of Valve with Steam (full of DRM, proprietary code, etc), it's still given hardware companies a reason to care about supporting Linux, especially when faced with competitors who already are on that path.
End result? Even if you're not using these proprietary software solutions, you may still end up benefiting from the improvements to the GNU/Linux ecosystem that came in their wake.
My much bigger gripe is actually with companies like Canonical, and moreso than that, the distributions that feel the need to do whatever Canonical is doing. For now, it's not a big deal, because I use Slackware, and really am not too worried that it'll follow the same trend (Our Supreme Dictator for Life has a tendency to be pretty stubborn about not fixing what isn't broken...especially when there are broken things left around to fix. We're still using LILO by default.). The de-unix-ification of Linux is the scariest part of its success to me, as even the long time established distributions (Debian goes back to 1993...) show themselves all to willing to make some serious head scratching decisions.
I'm not against progress...but I am against a trend where every year you're facing a situation where your personal choice in distribution ends up changing enough that you no longer have any sense of familiarity, all for a matter of features you didn't need/want, and a new list of bugs and security holes to go with it. When progress stops being focused on achieving goals to solve real problems, it stops being progress, and turns into chaotic turbulence.