Live data from Hacker News

Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

web.archive.org

131–140 of 147 posts

Re: Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

#131

Just yesterday I was watching his interview from a couple of years ago (in Finnish, sadly he doesn't do many of those any more). He credited having a fair amount of free time during his 8 years of studying at University of Helsinki being a fairly big enabler of how Linux happened (or how he had time to work on it). I found that interesting

I'm from the Helsinki University of Technology and it was not uncommon that people got their masters degree in about 10 years of studying and working simultaneously.

Re: Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

#132
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhere in a cavern full of sandals, a Stallmanu is quietly weeping.

I really dislike this snarky comment, but rather than down vote it, I thought I'd give an alternate view. I was around at the time that Linux was born. I remember the HURD. I had done some work on Mach while I was in university and I was hugely interested in working on the HURD. I sent email to MIB and essentially received a reply "We don't need you kid". But this is the way it was at the time. People working on GNU…

The best comment I've read on hacker news this week. Thank you.

Re: Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

#133

Although I’ve read this probably a dozen times. What I think about this today, as I’m about to reviel my next project is that it’s so crazy how things evolved for open source. Nowadays people compete with companies and having an announcment like this usually includes : - website explaining as a pitch what is better about your software - ready to use examples and templates to support your claim - branding with a logo…

> Writing something “cool” nowadays is not enough to be taken from the folks seriously.

Linux' success was not due to this message. I mean, the message advertised a toy OS in a group devoted to toy OSs, which naturally helped attract contributors, but it wasn't sue to that post why nowadays half the world runs on linux. Linux was also not the only FLOSS OS kernel out at that time, nor was it even working. In fact, arguably what made linux the success was the fact that, years later, they managed to get a working UNIX clone to run the full GNU stack, thus providing just enough features to offer a tool with practical use for a very specific use (servers).

Even then the main driving force wasn't the kernel itself but the distributions that managed to provide convenient software bundles that users could simply pickup and test and use. For those projects, providing those websites and templates and howtos and videos and tutorials was essential to get their foot on the door,because otherwise the barrier to entry would remain high and higher than any of their competitors'.

Re: Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were still in copyright battle with AT&T until 1994 and by that time it was too late, Linux was on its way.

This. Linux wasn't based on proprietary code, and wasn't saddled by any sort of license. The original BSD that Bell Labs gave to Berkeley in 1974 was anything but open source. It was an operating system that Bell had provided to the university with source code available for modification and redistribution ONLY to other universities WHO ALSO HELD research licenses from Bell Labs. And it still wasn't open-source in the…

A bit of revisionism going on there.

Bell Labs was allowed to finally start charging for UNIX after the split was done, so they went after the most attractive fish that were getting paid to sell UNIX, as AT&T wanted to bring it all back in house.

Re: Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

#135
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not detracting from Linus at all but it’s just a kernel - I think one of the BSD’s would have filled the void

I agree with this. It is likely that something else would've filled the void. Maybe something much better. Maybe we're missing on a lot because Linux popped up :)

We would all be using Aix, HP-UX, Tru64, Solaris, DG/UX, .... and Windows.

Re: Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

#136
post #107
post #69

"PS. Yes - it's free of any minix code" That's kind of interesting now. Most Linux installations today coexist with a management processor running Minix. So what was a sort of mild rivalry is now a détente.

I'd say most Linux installations today are Android mobiles. Do those have Minix too?

The Linux kernel is irrelevant for Android userspace as it isn't actually exposed in public APIs.

You might access Linux syscalls and certain paths, but the only guarantee is that it will work on your own device.

Re: Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

#137
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this. It is likely that something else would've filled the void. Maybe something much better. Maybe we're missing on a lot because Linux popped up :)

Nah, you’d be running Windows NT 9.3 platinum edition and liking it.

I am already running Windows 10 and liking it.

Re: Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

#138
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on what we had instead. The fact that Wintel systems had unlocked bootloaders was absolutely critical. But it could equally have been started on any system with an MMU. Certainly it's been ported to a lot of systems.

Was it important to have a monoculture is what I'm wondering.

> Was it important to have a monoculture is what I'm wondering

Obviously this is just speculation but I would say, no. And the reason I say that is that Linux primarily took off on the server side. Mobile was quite a lot later.

On the server side it wasn't a monoculture. Sun was a huge player. When we were making the case for Linux, around 2000, it was presented as a cost play against Sun/Solaris.

Of course, it's fair to say that part of the reason it was a cost play was because Intel kit was so cheap and that was a direct effect of the desktop environment. But I'd contend that it wasn't a reaction to the Wintel desktop monopoly.

Re: Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was it important to have a monoculture is what I'm wondering.

> Was it important to have a monoculture is what I'm wondering Obviously this is just speculation but I would say, no. And the reason I say that is that Linux primarily took off on the server side. Mobile was quite a lot later. On the server side it wasn't a monoculture. Sun was a huge player. When we were making the case for Linux, around 2000, it was presented as a cost play against Sun/Solaris. Of course, it's fai…

Thats a really interesting view on it, thanks

Re: Linus Torvalds announces Linux (1991)

#140
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Somewhere in a cavern full of sandals, a Stallmanu is quietly weeping.

I really dislike this snarky comment, but rather than down vote it, I thought I'd give an alternate view. I was around at the time that Linux was born. I remember the HURD. I had done some work on Mach while I was in university and I was hugely interested in working on the HURD. I sent email to MIB and essentially received a reply "We don't need you kid". But this is the way it was at the time. People working on GNU…

Holy shit. Goosebumps. Thank you for writing this. I vaguely knew about all of these characters (RMS, ESR, Linus) but this ties it together nicely.
Post reply on HN