Disclaimer: I never liked Torvalds. I honestly believe free software would be better off without him.
That said.... My impression is Torvalds never cared about free software at all. The idea doesn't matter to him. He's fascinated by the fact that he leads a group of people who created a wonderful, advanced piece of software, and he's happy to see this code used in whatever product you could think of. Tivo.
He also doesn't acknowlegde that there's anything of importance in the free software ecosystem beside the kernel. For him, the kernel is the operating system. He doesn't run Ubuntu or Red Hat or Fedora... he runs Linux.
So while from my point of view freedom matters and alignment with desktop systems matters and working with upstream matters etc. etc. etc., he only looks at the kernel, says "Oh. Linux. How nice." and never cares about the rest.
This is why I fall in love with Maemo (in spite of all its shortcomings), while he - as I have to admit - has a much wider range of products to choose from.
Personally I think the next phone Linus will be getting will be a maemo device assuming:
* no keyboard
* ovi maps 3.0
* better battery life
* Linus will probably realize that are quite a few apps that he needs on linux that limited Android functionality won't address.
next maemo device without a physical keyboard is scary (for me)
Its clear from the blog entry that Linus is pretty much "I-am-not-a-power-user" mobile device user and a reluctant one at that.
yea, he writes linux kernel for a living, its a lot of cool complicated stuff he does all the time, and maybe unlike others he has no need at all of having a device which also has a terminal, ssh access and all the openness that n900 has. Makes sense for not *going for* n900.
For those of you who've spoken strongly against religions and faith... now is your chance to empathize with them. Because for all intent and purposes, the discussion on this thread has largely been religious
For those of you who've spoken strongly against religions and faith... now is your chance to empathize with them. Because for all intent and purposes, the discussion on this thread has largely been religious
I empathize.
I'd like to point out, though, that one might call this politics and/or philosophy instead.
One might also call religion politics (in some cases, at least) and/or philosophy and one might not be happy with any particular politics/philosophy of choice.
Point being: Just because one might criticize some strongly held idea, it doesn't necessarily mean one should not be a zealot when it comes to Freedom and openness
But, in my opinion, one shouldn't make others feel like something the cat has dragged in, so even if one thinks some individuals idea is silly, one should often probably shut up about it to their face.
I'd like to point out, though, that one might call this politics and/or philosophy instead.
One might also call religion politics (in some cases, at least) and/or philosophy and one might not be happy with any particular politics/philosophy of choice.
Point being: Just because one might criticize some strongly held idea, it doesn't necessarily mean one should not be a zealot when it comes to Freedom and openness
That's how they feel about their belief and values too
Originally Posted by
But, in my opinion, one shouldn't make others feel like something the cat has dragged in, so even if one thinks some individuals idea is silly, one should often probably shut up about it to their face.
This is just politics to avoid friction. You're not being sincere.
