Thread: How to get rid of linux ?

My choice in working with linux is whether or not it fits the bill. Linux is much more rock solid than windows. I just look at the uptime of any linux vs. windows machine for a warm fuzzy.

I wanted to implement RAID-1 on all my machines after losing a hard drive. Well, didn't take much effort to get that setup. You're probably saying "you could have bought a RAID card". Well, I didn't have to. I poured a little sweat into finding procedures and I poured what I would have spent on that card into by budget to buying bigger hard drives, and getting more bang-for-the-buck. Now I have a configuration that is more flexible and usable than a simple RAID card would have done. And besides, most of those things needs windows drivers to run anyway, because they are software RAID of their own. Bah!

I have sent in patches to other projects, where I may have chipped in $0.01 worth of effort, but adding that up with all the other little fixes people are doing, and things add up. The effect is multiplicative. M$ and their attitude of knocking competition off the market doesn't lead to better software. If M$ opened up their software code base, many in the Linux community would welcome the healthy competition. But they won't. Instead, we are in healthy competition between different distros, along with components from the BSD community. Thus, any GNU/Linux distribution contains BSD components, GNU components, and more.

To me the best software wins, and that pulled me into Linux several years ago.

Originally Posted by kraft

Gpl and other crap is making that developping for linux is not that interesting for business and probably this is why there are not so many companies to adopt linux which prefers to run Microsoft's products...

Wow, Given your discussion of using FPGA's I know that you must be a pretty knowledgeable person when it comes to embedded systems and electronics. So it shocks me to see you write something like this.
Linux usage is growing by leaps and bounds according to all the market data that I have seen, and as a professional in the avionics field, I have seen a lot of it.

and nobody says you have to license things under GPL, as long as you don't use GPL-ed code, so i really don't see what all the fuss is about.

Originally Posted by s003apr

Wow, Given your discussion of using FPGA's I know that you must be a pretty knowledgeable person when it comes to embedded systems and electronics. So it shocks me to see you write something like this.
Linux usage is growing by leaps and bounds according to all the market data that I have seen, and as a professional in the avionics field, I have seen a lot of it.

Linux + x86 was the painless solution that's why i chosed it instead of having headaches with fully embedded solutions.
FPGA or any alternate solution as ARM, uClinux with a fully paid licence for a micro kernel is the solution to avoid all this useless nagging around lame attempts from some of us to get all for nothing.

What could lead linux to defeat versus microsoft is the dust made around gpl licence that makes people not being able to understand that everything with linux must not have to be free.
The sad part is that some of the linux community are still in confusion about gpl, open source and often open source means free in people's mind.

If i write something i'm not supposed to release the code for the reason i could use aside of the thing i wrote some gpl code. What i'm supposed to communicate is the sources of what is gpl inside my work nothing more, seems that it's not yet clear enough.

I.e : i wrote my crap regardless if it is or not nice, i designed my crappy front-ends as well, i've been surprised to read someone pretending to be a lawyer or advocate or something, that i have to release my work including my graphic design now where are the cameras ? and what are all those f* parasits ?

Linux was a funny and pleasant experience anyway and i don't blame linux, it's fun for hobbyists.