Google Doubles Down on Linux and Open Source (zdnet.com) 162
Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, writing for ZDNet: Google couldn't exist without Linux and open-source software. While you may not think of Google as a Linux company in the same way as you do Canonical, Red Hat, or SUSE, it wouldn't be the search and advertising giant it is today without Linux. So, it makes sense that Google is moving up from its Silver membership in The Linux Foundation, to the Platinum level. With this jump in status, Google gets a seat on the Foundation's board of directors. This position will be filled by Sarah Novotny, the head of open source strategy for Google Cloud Platform. Earlier this week, Chinese tech giant Tencent joined the Linux Foundation as a platinum member.
Re: (Score:3)
I believe I have detected a nest of butthurt redmond weenies.
Microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
Why do I get the feeling this is less about Google doubling-down on Open Source / Linux, and has more to do with the fact they don't want to be out-done by Microsoft, who is already a Platinum level member. This is just more of a corporate pissing contest.
Re:Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
That and if you have millions/billions of dollars invested in a Linux Infrastructure. Do you really want your competitors make decisions on what direction the product takes?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Linux foundation pays Linus's salary and they pay for the parties. Otherwise, they are a just a bunch of circle jerking wankers as you would expect.
Re: (Score:2)
Forking isn't always a viable solution. Lets say you fork a solution, because you need a particular feature. The application isn't static, time changes and the main line app gets a lot of good features also, which you will need to incorporate in yours. It is easier to push for that particular feature then having a separate code base to be maintained.
Re: Microsoft (Score:2)
Linux development is free. Some people have to earn a living and the living that they earn is writing Linux internals code. It also takes a large number of eyes to review new Linux code. It takes a large number of eyes to see how the coat integrates into the kernel. And it takes a lot of money to host all those competing distributions. I'm extremely grateful for the Platinum members and their financial contributions.
Re: (Score:2)
Yer yer [sic] just fork the kernel, so simplez. No implications. So cheap because open source.
The Linux kernel has been forked many times and is forked now. Many embedded device vendors fork the Linux kernel to name just one significant sector. That is perfectly OK, so long as they provide their patches and build instructions when asked, or even better, without needing to be asked.
Re: Microsoft (Score:2)
Patching the kernel is not the same thing as forking.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it is.
Re: Microsoft (Score:3)
No, it really isn't.
Forking means you have no plans to ever rebase your changes, because you aim to become the new upstream.
Re: (Score:2)
So "plans" are the difference between forking and patching, according to you? Good luck with that.
Re: Microsoft (Score:3)
Intention is also what makes the difference between a lifetime in jail or not.
It's crazy how the world works, isn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
Let me get this straight, you are seriously making an equivalence between forking and a lifetime in jail? Please.
Re: Microsoft (Score:2)
I am making a parallel between the difference between murder and manslaughter and the difference between a fork and a patch.
Both are a matter of intention, which you said was irrelevant.
Re: (Score:2)
Forks and patches have nothing to do with murder.
Re: Microsoft (Score:2)
I never claimed they did. Why are you making irrelevant statements?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm having a bit of fun with you because your argument is so idiotic. Every time you make a change of any kind to a code base, you fork it. Whether you keep it forked or not is up to you. If you had ever used git you would know this, so I assume that you have not.
Re: Microsoft (Score:2)
I have branched the Linux kernel (but never managed to get my patches merged), I know how to use git.
This is not what forking a project means. The only one making idiotic statements is you.
Re: (Score:2)
I have branched the Linux kernel (but never managed to get my patches merged)
Well, now that you have put in the effort to create a fork of Linux, you can enjoy it yourself if it does something useful enough to live. If you want to call it a branch, go right ahead, but everybody except you understands that fork and branch are synonyms with respect to a code base.
Re: (Score:2)
Just out of interest, how do you think the kernel gets changed? How do you think the kernel gets changed into a fork? How are these not the same? Are you really as clueless as you seem?
Re: (Score:2)
Even ubuntu's kernels are not 100% upstream, they have their own kernel engineers.
And Red Hat kernels are massively forked from mainline. It's actually really ugly, but that is Red Hat's business model in a nutshell: 1) fork old mainline kernel by backporting a massive number of patches from more up to date kernels 2) do this as quickly as possible with as little testing as possible 3) ship it 4) charge customers big money for chasing the many resulting bugs.
Re: (Score:2)
And to avoid getting caught at this and continue to lure new unsuspecting victims, make the RHEL Buzilla subscriber-only so nobody outside gets to see just how buggy the RHEL kernels really are.
Re: (Score:2)
Red Hat only has a Silver membership
That just means, the issue has not appeared on a powerpoint in Raleigh yet. It does not take a rocket scientist to realize that that will soon change.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
They'll use tar and gzip.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Microsoft (Score:5, Interesting)
If you are Google it pays to purchase some cheap insurance against Microsoft doing something that could screw you.
Once you get to Google, Microsoft, Apple size, then you need people on all the key committees. These people purchase connections and goodwill. When an important decision comes up, you have the connections and goodwill to ensure it goes your way.
Re: (Score:2)
If you are Google it pays to purchase some cheap insurance against Microsoft doing something that could screw you.
What could they do? Actually more to the point why would they do it? Microsoft and Google both use Linux to run critical parts of their cloud infrastructure which is one of the biggest and most profitable parts of their respective businesses. Anybody thinking Microsoft has any interest in destroying Linux needs to get with the times and stop living in the early Ballmer-era of Microsoft.
These days there is very little overlap between Windows and Linux, they simply aren't competitors in the vast majority of s
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft and Google both use Linux to run critical parts of their cloud infrastructure which is one of the biggest and most profitable parts of their respective businesses.
For Microsoft, they also have a huge fraction of their Azure customers wanting to run Linux vms, not Windows.
Anybody thinking Microsoft has any interest in destroying Linux needs to get with the times
Don't kid yourself, Microsoft would still love to destroy Linux and rule the world. But they already tried their hardest and failed hard. Now they are trying the next best thing. If they ever perceive an opportune moment to strike again, they will.
These days there is very little overlap between Windows and Linux, they simply aren't competitors in the vast majority of spaces that they are used.
That is completely wrong as any idiot can see. Microsoft would love to own the webserver, data center, HPC and embedded spaces that Linux rules, don't kid
Re: (Score:2)
That is completely wrong as any idiot can see. Microsoft would love to own the webserver, data center, HPC and embedded spaces that Linux rules, don't kid yourself.
What company wouldn't love that? Fact is they don't and they really can't, they gave up on trying to compete in markets that they clearly can't compete with Linux in and instead are leveraging Linux as a tool to run their business just like everybody else. Destroying Linux makes no sense and in fact even when Ballmer famously said 'Linux is a cancer' quite clearly he wasn't even referring to Linux at all but the viral nature of the GPL, not to mention at the time quite a lot (though less than what they have
Re:Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
Why do I get the feeling this is less about Google doubling-down on Open Source / Linux, and has more to do with the fact they don't want to be out-done by Microsoft, who is already a Platinum level member. This is just more of a corporate pissing contest.
Google couldn't exist without Linux and open-source software...
Uh, given this fact, Google should have recognized the relationship and upped their membership (and contributions) long ago. Cheap bastards.
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe this "fact" had nothing to do with any of their decision making process.
Back before Google was little more than a tiny search engine and didn't have billions in the bank to blow, I highly doubt their decision to go with Linux and open-source software had nothing to do with cost.
And in business, every fucking decision making process has to do with cost.
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe this "fact" had nothing to do with any of their decision making process.
Back before Google was little more than a tiny search engine and didn't have billions in the bank to blow, I highly doubt their decision to go with Linux and open-source software had nothing to do with cost.
And in business, every fucking decision making process has to do with cost.
Google has RAPED linux and continue to do so (Android).. to claim they support open source is a sad and bad joke... they are EVIL as are Microsoft, Amazon, Apple and Facebook.
No doubt mega-corps ultimately end up doing "evil shit" in the eyes of someone out there, but when you can find a mega-corp that's completely innocent of this, then I'll believe it's somehow not a basic given trait of US Capitalism. There's zero sense in calling some companies out on this when every damn one of them is guilty.
Tux is on the floor bleeding from his little penguin butthole ... and has been ever since Android was created.
So don't come here and defend Google and their "dedication to open source"... that is just pure bullshit!
Uh, I was the one calling them cheap bastards. I don't know how the hell that translates to defending them. That being said, can you tell me exactly what the fuck the point of OPEN
Re: (Score:2)
Google should have recognized the relationship and upped their membership (and contributions) long ago. Cheap bastards.
You didn't know that about Google until now? Welcome to the land of the enlightened.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
At the same time, it is pathetic that Google was not at the highest level of membership already. See, there is a significant faction [google.com] at Google that hates Linux and everything GPL. This faction has largely had the upper hand so far because of apathy in the executive suite. The usual theory "we are so rich so everything we do must be right". Including treating Linux as a second class citizen in favour of their BSD stable. Now they are forced by Microsoft to take a position. Ironic indeed.
Re: (Score:2)
Only APK thinks that $random_link = $proof.
Please provide actual evidence, or go home.
Re: (Score:2)
You have been informed. Now find your own proof or refutation.
Re: (Score:2)
I have not been informed of anything, because you have provided no relevant information.
It is not my responsibility to find proof for your claim; it's yours. Provide said proof or STFU.
Re: (Score:2)
You refute it or STFU. For the rest of you with eyes to read, you have been informed. Now research this guy and learn the ugly truth.
Re: (Score:3)
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence."
The burden of proof lies on the one making the claim.
And you can fuck right off. We're done here.
Re: (Score:2)
Hi Chris.
Re: (Score:2)
Probs how system d got accepted. Cruel trick by m$.
Almost right. It was a cruel trick by Red Hat, the "Microsoft" of open source.
Re: (Score:1)
Without discounting contributions of Google to linux, I am concerned about presence of these mega-corporations in such influential positions within Linux Foundation and open source world in general. Somehow, it feels more likely that linux will be driven in a direction more favorable to corporations than the community in general. Android and Chromium browser are perfect examples... even though they are open source, they are heavily focused on serving Googles best interest as opposed to core principles of op
Re: (Score:2)
I am concerned about presence of these mega-corporations in such influential positions within Linux Foundation and open source world in general.
Linux Foundation is not influential in the Linux world, they just provide the party fund. Otherwise they are widely regarded as a bunch of ineffectual, self important PHBs. If Jim Zemlin ever worked up the spit to try to tell Linus what to do, Linus would instead tell him what to do in very clear terms and Zemlin would just have to say, thanks Linus, I needed that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Google is responsible for a large proportion of the software installed on devices using the Linux kernel. But it seems they don't acknowledge that...
You only just now realized that Google guys are intellectually dishonest?
Re: (Score:2)
you don't know for sure whether there is anti-GPL 'faction' in Google
There is and I do.
Insurance (Score:2)
You're right to suggest this is a direct consequence, but is more like to be insurance for Google to stop Microsoft screwing them over decisions.
The rest of use might as well walk on by, the idea of open source being about communities is long gone.
Re: (Score:1)
Except for the fact that is widely copied and used. I do like more subtle 3d effects in my UI, but Flat is in. But this is a trend that moves around.
1980s Flat was in Think TNG LCARs interface. A lot of hardware that didn't require a lot of typing used membrane buttons, just to give the flat look. Then When graphic interfaces came up. We started to move more towards 3d effects in the 1990's Windows 3.1, Motif. We hard the colors and the ability so 3d effects were cool. Then when we gone to 8bit color and
I'll believe it when... (Score:5, Interesting)
...we finally get a Linux client for Google Drive.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It exists! Sort of. With Ubuntu: Settings > Accounts
Re:I'll believe it when... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Disagree; Linux and *cough* BSD "key users" know better than to use Google drive; we have our own servers, thanks...
We don't use Gmail either...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are the existing Fuse/KDE/Gnome VFS plugins not what you'd like to see?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
...we finally get a Linux client for Google Drive.
Why? Dolphin and other clients can interact with it, wrapping all your file needs into 1 app without the need for more apps to be open. I can access Google drive, dropbox, mega and other SSH locations all from one app.
Re: (Score:1)
Why?
Because people what a tool that will work no matter how they are accessing the files: Dolphin, Konsole, ssh session, whatever. And they want to access them offline. And they want to include the files in system backups.
With Chromium/ChromeOS Google's a major player (Score:3)
I'm trying to find a consistent number for ChromeOS in terms of new PC sales - trying to research the number, it ranges from 80% to 300% of Linux installs according to different sources. Obviously, ChromeOS is not used in servers but I suspect that it is the largest distribution of the Linux kernel in new PC (primarily laptop) sales.
Chromium and ChromeOS are "based on Linux" and use a pretty big piece of the code base - this along with the footprint they have would make them a major player in the Linux world and it would be appropriate for Google to have a seat at the Linux table.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't that make Samsung the number one Linux distributor? After all, Samsung does not distribute vanilla Android, they distribute their own forked version, much as any Linux distributor does.
Re: (Score:2)
Its userspace is also very similar to a busybox userspace (actually uses toolbox, which is their own version of busybox) which is pretty similar to GNU...
I have no problem calling ChromeOS Linux. I'm also completely sure that you're correct that only a tiny fraction of new non-server PC sales come with a flavor of Linux that isn't ChromeOS.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't say open source is embracing locked down systems, but the success of those systems is also an advertisement for open source.
I think Linux benefits from the WSL. It increases mindshare, and increases use of the GNU/Linux ecosystem, particularly for developers who are using Windows. It could be their preparatory course for making the switch.
ChromeOS is an actively suppor
Re: (Score:2)
I'm also completely sure that you're correct that only a tiny fraction of new non-server PC sales come with a flavor of Linux that isn't ChromeOS.
A tiny fraction, but still large in absolute numbers, and rapidly growing. For example, check this out. [acer.com]
Re: (Score:2)
and rapidly growing
It sure is, and I have monetarily supported their experiment, and will continue to do so.
I wasn't aware the Aspire line now had officially supported linux models- that's awesome. What I'd really like to see though are some ultra-light Linux celeron laptops with silly battery life. I'm currently using a ChomeBook that's been converted to running Kubuntu natively, and I've absolutely fallen in love with it. All it needs is a real keyboard. This Bay Trail Celeron may be pretty gutless, but it gets the job don
Re: (Score:2)
I'm trying to find a consistent number for ChromeOS in terms of new PC sales...
One data point: ChromeOS is now over 60% of US K12 sales. Microsoft is a distant second and Apple has been squeezed to oblivion.
dumping the linux kernel on Android (Score:2, Insightful)
And scaling back ChromeOS product developement.
Yea, I don't understand how that's increasing the support for Linux.
I'd describe it as lining the pockets of The Linux Foundation and installing an insider that can steer Linux towards what Google wants, which apparently includes the destruction of Linux. (see above)
in short - Google and The Linux Foundation are full of shit.
CRE!MER KARMA WHORE ALERT (Score:1)
Oh shut up chris that barely has to do with the story you're just hoping to get upmodded "informative" so that you can increase visibility to the links you post to your blog and amazon affiliate links.
Nobody cares about the barely insider information that you accquired during your prematurely terminated 3rd party helpdesk contract.
I can't believe you made a blog post entitled "My 'complicated' work history at google" why the fuck would you post that where employers can see it?
Dear diary I got fired from a s
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Recruiters also want to know about your Microsoft security certs
The words "microsoft" and "security" do not belong in the same sentence.
Well... Open source software anyway. (Score:2)
Google couldn't exist without Linux and open-source software.
I'm sure they could do just fine using BSD.
Re: (Score:2)
Google couldn't exist without Linux and open-source software.
I'm sure they could do just fine using BSD.
Haha, you really know how to tell 'em, will you be here all night?
Platinum is actually cheaper than gold since 2015 (Score:2)
Re:Platinum is actually cheaper than gold since 20 (Score:5, Insightful)
I can't imagine having my primary desktop being anything else anymore, after years of using Windows and MacOS.
I of course acknowledge that that is an opinion, and inherently worthless- much like your post.
Re:Platinum is actually cheaper than gold since 20 (Score:5, Informative)
Not even sure I would agree with the not user friendly. Something like Linux Mint is a lot more user friendly than Windows 10. I spend 95% of my desktop time on a linux machine, but still have to fire up windows for certain software packages.
Fusion360, Photoshop and a decent video editor. Those are why I find myself firing up windows. (not to mention games but I haven't played in ages anyway)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
windows isn't user friendly either, that is the worst of it all, how this myth is still standing today is a mistery to me.
Run to the Hills - Nothing ever changes - HURD? (Score:1)
Does anyone else get goose-bumps, and expect a really bad copyrights/patent showdown within the next few years with all those traditionally perceived as utterly EVIL companies (IBM, for years, collaborators in WW2, Microsoft, embrace and extinguish, 'FOSS is a Cancer', and now Google, your favourite brainwashing I mean hearts and minds company 'BE EVIL', now apparently bowing at the Altar of Torvalds), showing their treacherous cards? Personally, I don't trust any of them, in any context. I wish for all thr
Re: (Score:2)
Finally time to go HURD, anyone?
I just installed Debian/HURD on a VM 2 evenings ago to see how it was coming along...
Let me answer that question for you: No.
Re: (Score:2)
It's been decades and HURD isn't even remotely usable. In a shorter time than that Apple has gone from the brink of bankruptcy to the most valuable company in the world, Microsoft has moved from a company with a CEO that called Linux (or rather the GPL) a cancer to one that's most profitable business segment depends on Linux and even has a Linux compatibility layer in Windows, Google completely dominating search, Amazon going from just online shopping to a cloud computing giant that relies on Linux and Linu
And this is how you pay for OSS (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Open Source software gets paid for by tracking users and selling their information to advertisers.
Google pays roughly fuck all into the Linux community. Employs a few kernel hackers, mostly for its own hacked production kernel but a couple just doing whatever they want like Andrew Morton and Ted Tys'o. Other much smaller companies put a lot more money into the community, and are correspondingly more respected.
Couldn't exist? (Score:2)
False. BSD or even Windows Server would have been a sufficient platform to develop the Google server infrastructure.
Less efficient, perhaps, but hardly impossible.
Re: (Score:1)
Wow, you don't know much about computers, do you.
Discussion (Score:1)