Comments on: Saving Linux from the lawyers

CEO Stuart Cohen talks about OSDL's efforts to head off patent claims against the community-developed operating system.

Head in the sand.

Of course no one is suing yet because no substantial value has been created yet that ties to the OS. This is what I warn my clients about constantly when the subject of Linux rears its ugly head. That is, no infringement lawsuits have occured yet because no potentially billion dollar business hinges on the OS's technology. Once that occurs the lawsuits will fly. Well to be perfectly honest, one technology may have already started this and it's start with a big G and ends with an e, but the SCO vs. IBM lawsuit may solve that one if SCO prevails. :-)

[ddesy]

FUD

Talk about FUD!!

"This is what I warn my clients about constantly when the subject of Linux rears its ugly head." you say.

I hate to break it to you, but Linux isn't ugly. In fact, it's been proving itself for some time now. Wake up and smell the coffee, and get off that MS bandwagon.

Heads where?

If this is the advice you give your clients, and they are buying it, their heads are in a bad place as well...

[Johnny Mnemonic]

The difference between Linux and Windows...

Everything comes from somewhere. Linux was not
written from scratch. The kernel was coded from
scratch, but the ideas and philosophy behind Linux
can be traced back to the original AT&T UNIX
system. Likewise, much of the software for Linux
(C compiler, X Windows, filesystem utilities,
etc.) was available on the various UNIX systems
long before Linux was even a thought.

The difference, of course, is that Linux *legally*
used the ideas and designs already available.
Microsoft cannot claim the same thing; by using
VMS code in NT, they actually committed copyright
infringement. If DEC patented any parts of their
system, then MS would also have committed patent
infringement. Of course Digital let Microsoft off
easy by settling out of court. Even when MS loses,
they still win.

In addition, Windows does not follow global
protocol standards correctly. It even deliberately
ignores them in favor of proprietary
implementations. Windows' code is a collection of
bad programming practices.It contains a huge
amount of sloppy code and kludgey design, which
results in an extremely glitchy and buggy end
product. (A good example of sloppy programming is
buffer access, which is routinely left unchecked
in release versions of all Microsoft products. As
a result of this amateur approach, Microsoft
products are riddled with buffer overrun
vulnerabilities. Of course buffer overruns don't
only occur in Microsoft products but are also
found in other software on other platforms. But
the difference is in the numbers.) Bloated code
has made Windows' efficiency the lowest in the
market, requiring more resources and yielding less
performance than any other OS in existence.
Microsoft products have the worst security rating
(and track record) in the industry. Their
developers seem to have been completely unaware of
even basic security issues.

But, when you are a monopoly, the motivation to
provide a stable and secure product is greatly
minimized. Such is the major difference between a
proprietary monopoly System like Windows and an
Open System like Linux.

[Thunder Johny]

big G

http://www.analogstereo.com/ford_f750_owners_manual.htm