Is Linux Splitting into Two Factions?
by Kevin Carmony
June 27th, 2007
With
the recent news of several Linux
vendors entering into partnership agreements with Microsoft
(Novell, Linspire, Xandros), there has been much
debate recently about two factions of Linux forming.
Saying that Linux is going to be torn in two, makes for
good press and lively debates, but this is certainly nothing
new for Linux. There are far more material splits today
in the Linux world, such as Debian vs RPM, KDE vs GNOME,
Distro A vs Distro B, and so on. These divisions are quite
material, and dilute significant energy and efforts across
competing standards. However, we accept this as the price
we pay for freedom of choice.
I
personally prefer Debian over RPM, KDE over GNOME, and,
of course, I prefer Linspire over other distributions; but,
this doesn't mean I think those who prefer RPM, GNOME, and
other distributions should stop what they are doing and
focus all their energy on Debian, KDE and Linspire. Each
is free to choose what works best for them. As long as there
are enough people interested in a particular approach, it's
likely that approach will continue and be available to those
who choose it. This is why there are hundreds
of different Linux distributions today.
The
argument that Linux will be torn apart by yet another set
of choices doesn't square with history. If it did, Linux
would have ceased to be long ago, given the multitude of
choices and competing approaches it already offers.
Since
our
announcement about working with Microsoft to build a
better Linux, I have watched the reactions
with interest. I've been sitting silently on the sidelines
as others have been sharing their views, but I feel the
need to set the record straight on some items and provide
a first hand view.
What
Linspire announced two weeks ago was: 1) nothing new, and
2) very simple.
Nothing
New
Linspire
has been entering into partnership agreements with commercial
software companies for years. We don't believe that you
bring more choice by limiting choice. I want to be able
to pick and choose which software, drivers and codecs are
right for me, be they open source, commercial, Linux, Windows,
Mac, etc.
Very
Simple
Linspire's
strategy has been a very simple one...build a Linux distribution
with more capabilities for desktop computing than any other
distro. We do that by starting with what we feel is the
best foundation that open source Linux has to offer for
desktop computing (Debian-based Ubuntu) and building critical
bits and pieces that provide more functionality and a better
user experience, such as:
-
Using
KDE (adds ease of use with a more comfortable
look and feel for most of today's computer users familiar
with Windows)
-
Modifying
Applications (to add features and increase ease
of use)
-
Adding
CNR (a one-click easy way to install, manage
and update thousands of applications, both open source
and commercial)
-
Adding
Proprietary Codecs (so you can play MP3 files,
watch DVDs, play Windows Media movie trailers, etc.)
-
Adding
Proprietary Software (include or provide access
to software like Win4Lin, Java, Flash, Parallels, commercial
games, etc.)
-
Adding
Proprietary Drivers (for better 3D graphic card
support, better WiFi support, etc.)
The
Moral High Ground
Lastly...some distributions have come out, claiming to be
taking the "morale high ground" by refusing to
give into "Microsoft threats," while openly promoting
the means of circumventing proprietary software on their
web sites, amounting to nothing more than high-brow software
piracy.
Some are claiming anti-Microsoft sentiment in regards to
our recent announcement, but I don't see them licensing
or respecting the IP from many others, not just Microsoft.
That's not how I define the "moral high ground."
Clearly
these distributions must have demand for these proprietary
technologies, because several tools exist which are promoted
on their sites to provide illegal copies of software, drivers
and codecs. They offer disclaimers about the laws in certain
countries, yet they must know that many of their customers
are using the information from within those countires. This
portrays more of an attitude of how to "get around"
the law, rather than trying to live within it. For me, the
true high ground is what Linspire has been doing from the
beginning, by respecting the law and openly licensing proprietary
software so that we can legally re-distribute that software
to the end user if they so choose.
For
Linux to be taken seriously by the mainstream distribution
channels and enterprise customers, it needs to respect the
IP of others. I’m quite sure Linspire has done more
than just about any other Linux distributor to license patents,
copyrights and trademarks so we can bring the best of open
source and proprietary offerings to our customers. I believe
this practice will mean something as Linux moves beyond
the early adopters to mainstream channels. I want our users
to have confidence when they use Linspire Linux, knowing
that it has crossed the t's and dotted the i's, and is a
fully legal and supported product. Microsoft is just one
of the dozens of companies we have entered into agreements
with to deliver on that promise.
I'm
fine with others who may disagree with Linspire's decision
to enter into such licensing deals, but I do take issue
with anyone spinning it that Linspire is somehow not taking
the high ground.
-
Kevin
To discuss this topic with others, click
here!
|
