<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Fred A. Miller wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:49710C6D.9060606@lightlink.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Linux Elitism: Fact or Fiction?
------------------------------------------------------------
For users reared on GUI-oriented commercial operating systems, switching
to open source POSIX-type OSes can be an onerous task. Whereas Linux,
and FOSS in general, are built around the ideas of inclusion and
sharing, the communities built up around the open source operating
systems often face accusations of exclusive techno-elitism.
See the Full Story:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.technewsworld.com/story/65853.html">http://www.technewsworld.com/story/65853.html</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
I do not personally think that Linux and FOSS in general are built
around the ideas of inclusion and sharing in general. I think that
they are built around the ideas of inclusion and sharing <u>among
persons of high technical skill and ability</u>. It is commercial
organizations, in general, which have made money (or attempted in vain
to make money...) using either a contraction or expansion of this
pattern. <br>
<br>
Google, for one very significant example, has made a huge fortune in
large part by using, promoting, and not sharing huge chunks of its
improvements and additions to FOSS code. We will see if they find a
way to make real money with Android; if they do, it will be a first for
them, making money by opening instead of closing code.<br>
<br>
Another is Sun Microsystems and Star/OpenOffice. StarOffice was closed
source until Sun bought it and opened it. If they are making money
from StarOffice/OpenOffice, they are making it by expanding the pattern
<u>beyond the level any Linux/FOSS groups ever did</u>. I do wonder if
Sun is making money from SO/OO. I hope so. If not, it's because of a
lack of effective publicity. If we all find out sadly that they
aren't, it will not be too surprising (Sun is historically rather
ungood at publicity), and the future general-population applicability
of OpenOffice will be thrown into serious doubt, unless some other
company realizes the potential gold-mine it represents. But I suspect
there are governments and probably other organizations, mostly
non-U.S., which are eager to pay Sun for the support for SO/OO.<br>
<br>
Yet another is Sun and Java. Sun seems to be doing rather well with
Java, selling deep support agreements to many different versions of
now-open Java. In a few years, Java may in fact become the poster
example of how to make money using completely open code.<br>
<br>
Contrariwise, of course, is Mozilla. So far as I can tell, they don't
seem to make any money at all, while being a drain on Sun and Google
and probably others. Most of the work on Firefox was being done by Sun
Microsystems employees, last time it was reported. I don't know how
long this can last; and this is a reason I am very happy to see the
Webkit project thriving in careful and deliberate hands like Nokia's. <br>
<br>
So. I do indeed find a pandemic of Linux elitism: there are the
technically advanced, whom Linux devotees and developers care lots
about, and there is everyone else, whom they don't care about very
much. Yes, there are exceptions; but they are exceptions. And this is
the underlying cause of why desktop Linux is simply not usable by the
technically nonadvanced.<br>
<br>
But I am certain that one or more companies, more than likely east
Asian companies (remember the auto industry in 1979?), will build a
desktop Linux worth using for all. I think it merely a matter of time.<br>
<br>
J.E.B.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>