Linux Creator Linus Torvalds Declined to Join Apple

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]w3k3m[/nom]The only reason why Linux took hold at all is because it was free. That's great, but there is no single technical merit or innovation in it, we are basically talking about an ancient 1970's style boring clone of UNIX. Architecturally, Linux is a stone-age operating system. From that point of view I find Linus definitely overrated and his remarks often very arrogant.[/citation]
It's open source. It's free. It's fast. It's stable. It allows all sorts of customization. Broad architecture and hardware support. It's superior to massively funded OSes such as Windows and OSX thanks to a loyal global community. Anything else?
 
[citation][nom]w3k3m[/nom]The only reason why Linux took hold at all is because it was free. That's great, but there is no single technical merit or innovation in it, we are basically talking about an ancient 1970's style boring clone of UNIX. Architecturally, Linux is a stone-age operating system. From that point of view I find Linus definitely overrated and his remarks often very arrogant.[/citation]
Linux took hold of the server market because it's faster more secure a a lot more flexible than the alternatives from Microsoft and Apple. As long it has that edge most server will use it, even if it's a OS from the stone age. It was certainly not because it was free. The sales of linux server distros (yes, you heard it right, sale) was almost on par with that of Microsoft. So even though it's available as a free download it's sales are about the same as windows server.
 
Torvalds and Jobs were not so different because of their attention to detail and they probably would have made a good fit from that perspective
Click to expand...
Tenuous link at best, they are massively different
firstly Linus is still alive
secondly he wouldn't boil his granny for a 1 cent rise of share prices
thirdly Linus is still alive
...
Hang on I did that one, but then, it's such a big difference it's worth mentioning twice
 
Maybe he didn't take the job because he knew he wouldn't last long at Apple. Jobs was an ego maniac who had a reputation for cheating and abusing people. And Linus has a long history of not suffering fools and telling them off spectacularly. I doubt he would have lasted a year there.
 
[citation][nom]nebun[/nom]dummy...like it or not Apple is bigger than Microsoft now.... he should have taken the job....I really like the idea that Apple develops it's own hardware, if Microsoft would do the same thing it could overtake Apple again.[/citation]
If both Microsoft and Apple products were to spontaneously combust. Which failure do you think would have a greater impact on daily life? "Bigger" is a matter of perspective.
 
[citation][nom]back_by_demand[/nom]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage [...] ms#ServersIt's about 64% Unix based to 36% windows based at presentI thought it would be a landslide too, till I looked it up[/citation]
Like I said, over 60% of servers and over 90% of supercomputers. :)
 
Linus Torvalds has real integrity and vision, whereas most people these days are narrow-minded black holes of selfishness with delusions of grandeur.

Ron Paul/Linus Torvalds 2012
 
[citation][nom]cryogenic[/nom]I wasn't talking about servers or supercomputers (you nimrods!), that's where Linux and Apple DON'T compete, I was talking about Desktop and Devices, where Linux is far from great (It downright sucks) ... And don't tell me all of you deal with supercomputers everyday you go to work or are server administrators for Linux Web Server Farms for a Fortune 1000 company ....[/citation]

Umm ... Android is built on a Linux kernal ... there are more Android devices activating on a daily basis than Apple products. Android is slated to surpass Apple in total mobile device in circulation in the next 12 to 18 months. So I am not quite sure where your getting your info about Linux.

Also, the reality behind "cloud" technology is things moving away from running as a local application, it is moving applications and services out onto the internet and run them on those servers and super computers (though super computers are a tiny percentage of infrastructure technology, and kinda specialized). Less an less is being done by the local device and more services are going online. Much of that is all running on Linux. A good example, maybe not of linux running something but Siri, the most notable new feature of the iPhone 4S requires a data connection because it is not processed by the phone, it is processed by servers. Knowing Apple, they are Mac OSX servers (one would think). iTunes, and the ability to buy and download apps/music/movies is all driven by servers not the iphone, the iphone is just a tool that has access to those services.

This is all really a moot point because iOS and Mac OSX are both based on FreeBSD which is just another semi-open source free version of unix. FreeBSD and Linux are basically fraternal twins, slightly different appearance but same general structure. So under the hood Apple products are basically unix boxes.

 
[citation][nom]v1ze[/nom]If both Microsoft and Apple products were to spontaneously combust. Which failure do you think would have a greater impact on daily life? "Bigger" is a matter of perspective.[/citation]

I am going to throw out there Microsoft, a bunch of phones would go poof if Apple products disappeared, but 50% of the business infrastructure and 93% of all desktop computers (business/public) would go poof if it was Microsoft. The remainder of the business infrastructure is all running on pretty much Linux. Apple is a giant in the public/entertainment sector, but Microsoft/Linux still make the world go round.
 
If you've ever typed a single line in a *nix term or answered the question "What is your computer" without saying you operating system IS you computer, then you know whay linus turned down steve jobs.
 
so linus writes the kernal for a free product... even if he is employed by red-hat or another for-pay-company... working at apple would have granted linus stock-options that would made him a richer man than he is now.

thus, linus choose fame over fortune. IMAO
 
[citation][nom]gm0n3y[/nom]They may have some similarities, but Apple is the figurehead of the movement towards closed everything. They want control over all hardware, software and data. Linux is the exact opposite of this. From that perspective there is no way that Linus could work for Apple without selling his soul.[/citation]

Ok, I agree that Apple likes closed software/data. But why? I am sure money has to do with it. But look at it this way, the "AVERAGE" person doesn't know/care about open source, most people like simple. When you have a closed platform then you can create a much better simpler user interface. I don't have any apple products, but itunes is extremely easy to use, iOS is extremely simple and easy to use. They have a good reason to do as they do.
You can say "oh they are isheep" or whatever is the new apple hating phrase, but it works and they have a GROWING not just big market.
 
[citation][nom]bigbaconeater[/nom]Ok, I agree that Apple likes closed software/data. But why? I am sure money has to do with it. But look at it this way, the "AVERAGE" person doesn't know/care about open source, most people like simple. When you have a closed platform then you can create a much better simpler user interface. I don't have any apple products, but itunes is extremely easy to use, iOS is extremely simple and easy to use. They have a good reason to do as they do. You can say "oh they are isheep" or whatever is the new apple hating phrase, but it works and they have a GROWING not just big market.[/citation]

Woah, hang a moment there, did you just say the AVERAGE person doesn't care or know about Open Source? Well I'll give you half a point for not knowing, but not caring is a whole different scale. Most people use it without knowing, and are very greatful for it too. Android is just one of a million different examples that people use without knowing that it's open source. There's also OpenOffice for those that can't afford a £80 ($128 USD) software suite.

Azureus/Vuze, eMule and ARES all use open source. So does VLC Player and Media Player Classic. 7Zip also uses it, which is a far superior tool to Winzip and (in my opinion) better than winrar too.

Your average user is someone who's happy as long as they can do what they want for free. Most of them will go to great extents to do so. If they have downloaded a video but can't play it, messing around with codecs is confusing, so they grab VLC/MPC/or any other player that has internal codecs. They'll use clients that use Bittorrent or other peer2peer methods, most of which are OpenSource, and have fun on their Android phones. True not everyone uses Android or any of these apps, but I'd certainly go as far to say that not your average user manages to avoid all open source based projects and still use a computer or other advanced electronic device.

Honestly, you'd have to know a heck of a lot to be able to avoid it, and if you do and did, you're missing on so much that you're only shooting yourself in the foot. I couldn't even begin to count the number of open source apps I use, and that's not just because I have so many of them XD
 


Also a lot of closed source companys use open source code. Including microsoft! I would also not be surprised at all if apple also use open source code.


Soo many trolls on this thread!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom