Re: About satandrads and politics

["Bud Beckman" <n7su@micron.net>]

>On Thu, 5 Aug 1999, Bud Beckman wrote:
>
>> Anyone who is familiar with Linux would know that the editor vi is
>> available and can get it.
>
>This  sounds a lot like MS's arguments about IE/NS.


Well, it is true. I thought it would be smart for MS to include Netscape
on their CD, legally and morally, it would put them in a position to
prove to the justice dept. they were "nice" guys, really!
>
>> A newbie would wonder, a bit like me, what all
>> the fuss is about.
>
>The fuss is about interoperability and standards compliance. Have you
>noticed how Microsofts products do not easily interoperate with other
>products ? Well this is the kind of thing that happens when people
forget
>the importance of standards.

Yep! That is something I was hollering about when I first started to put
my hands on a computer keyboard. We are consumers looking for the best
buy and not the best standard, sorry to say. MS has been able to take the
competition and bend it to its own liking because it had "market share."
>
>Linux is by and large a POSIX compliant operating system, and that has
>been one of the major goals/features for a long time. Calling a non
POSIX
>compiant OS "Linux" and selling it to the mass market is grossly
>misleading/unethical.

What is the OS? The kernal, the 700 or so kb? The kernal and modules? I
don't know. I can be wrong, often am, but I thought Linus wrote the first
kernal and more or less made it public domain, GPL.
>
>[ irrelevant analogy snipped ]

Hey, I had fun writing that.
>
>> Sure, if I want. Linux and silver are malleable
>> to ones own desires.
>
>Do what you want with it in the privacy of your bedroom, but be aware
that
>it is somewhat irresponsible to ship a nonstandard version of linux to
the
>market.
>
Not having read what the standards are, I can not comment. Each
distribution is the same? No. Maybe just the installation is different
and the standards are inherently the same. I plead ignorance.
>--
>Donovan
>
Bud