Miscellaneous > The Lounge
Linus is EVIL
Jenda:
Linus might not be genius, or a celebrity, but he is an icon. We can all put him, as the father of Linux, as a counterpart to Bill Gates, the father of Windows, MS, and DOS.
note: the mother of DOS was Tim Paterson. He was raped by Bill. It was a Quick&Dirty OS...
WMD:
Linus isn't really the "father of Linux," though. If he hadn't started The Hurd*, arguably Richard Stallman would be the official "father of Linux" - he already has leadership on the basic GNU/Linux userland. Linus is just the kernel. He's quite a celebrity for that, and he deserves on the basis of his fantastic leadership of the kernel development. But being the "father of Linux" would, IMO, require a stronger belief in open source/Free Software than Linus has.
*- I just feel like mentioning...Hurd began development in 1989 and hasn't seen an official release yet. Pathetic.
muzzy:
Umm WMD, Linux is named Linux because it's made by Linus. Notice any resemblance in the names? Stallman has nothing to do with linux, he's only responsible for the GNU system and the GNU project. Now, GNU/Linux is called GNU because the userland is a GNU system. Plain and simple, the operating system from userland perspective is GNU, not Linux. Linux is indeed just the kernel as you note, and as of such it has nothing to do with Stallman.
Linus is the father of Linux alright.
TB:
--- Quote from: Jenda ---
note: the mother of DOS was Tim Paterson. He was raped by Bill. It was a Quick&Dirty OS...
--- End quote ---
Curious........I always thought the late Gary Kildall was the father of DOS.
muzzy:
--- Quote from: TB ---Curious........I always thought the late Gary Kildall was the father of DOS.
--- End quote ---
Well, this obviously depends on what you mean when you say "DOS". Microsoft indeed bought QDOS that was written by Paterson. Kildall however wrote CP/M, which some people call "DOS" since it's a disk operating system. So, the people who claim Kildall is father of DOS refer to DOS as a concept, not as a product. This causes some confusion. In my opinion, whoever should be called "the father of DOS" depends on how you define "DOS".
I don't really know the history regarding this too well, but quick googling confirms my above view. If you know something else that's relevant to the case, do tell.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version