30 years of Linux: OS was successful because of how it was licensed, says Red Hat
- Reference: 1629890347
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2021/08/25/30_years_of_linux_red_hat/
- Source link:
In a post today celebrating the anniversary, Red Hat said: "The reason that Linux has been arguably the most successful operating system of all time is due to the fact that its license allowed copying, improvement, distribution and required sharing of changes. (Note that the license does not require collaboration, but the reciprocal nature of Linux strongly encourages it.)"
Making Linux GPL'd was definitely the best thing I ever did
That license is the [1]GPLv2 . Red Hat quotes Torvalds who discussed the matter in a [2]1997 interview .
"I actually originally released Linux with complete sources under a non-GPL copyright that was actually much more restrictive than the GPL: it required that all sources always be available, and it also didn't allow any money to be exchanged for Linux at all," said Torvalds.
"That original copyright was mainly a reaction against the operating system I had been trying to use before Linux: Minix. Minix was meant to be a teaching operating system, but it had been too limited and in my opinion too expensive for that … so when I made Linux, I wanted it to be easily available over ftp with full sources, and I did _not_ want it to be too expensive for anybody. I changed the copyright to the GPL within roughly half a year: it quickly became evident that my original copyright was so restrictive that it prohibited some entirely valid uses … making Linux GPL'd was definitely the best thing I ever did."
[3]
Red Hat Linux, yours in 1994 for just $39.95 (though still in beta)
Red Hat is perhaps the most commercial of Linux distros and it appears that it started as it meant to go on. The [4]first public release was issued by Marc Ewing in November 1994 with the top feature listed as "Retail price $49.95 – introductory special: $39.95."
Red Hat [5]confessed that this "was actually a paid beta and not a 1.0."
[6]
The company now argues that the ability to charge for Linux was important to its success. "By removing restrictions to commercial use and so forth, Torvalds opened the door to companies improving and distributing Linux," said today's post.
[7]
[8]
Has Linux become too commercial and corporate? Mike McGrath, Red Hat VP of Linux Engineering, told us: "The big thing has been the competition for that community talent. If you are a developer that wants to get involved in open source, there has never been more opportunity… the corporate side of it, I don't view that as a negative. It's a positive consequence of the success of Linux in businesses."
[9]Happy birthday, Linux: From a bedroom project to billions of devices in 30 years
[10]Could it be? Really? The Year of Linux on the Desktop is almost here, and it's... Windows-shaped?
[11]No place like GNOME: 41 is in beta, features frozen for forthcoming release
[12]Linux 5.14 had plenty of commits, work has gone smoothly – and it should debut next week
[13]Asahi Linux progress: Apple Silicon OS works – though it's 'rough around the edges' and has no GUI acceleration
A remarkable aspect of the Linux story is that Torvalds is still leading it. "I first got started in 1995 with Linux, I think it would have been surprising to me [then] that he still had the chair and was doing such a good job at it," said McGrath. What will happen when Torvalds stands down? "We've got a whole business based on Linux, so succession planning is very important to us," he said, adding: "As with any community, we respect their autonomy… I don't know what the open source equivalent of a business continuity plan is though I hope the Linux Foundation does. There are certainly people that could step in and take over from Linus if he chose to step down."
The success of Linux is extraordinary, but it could be better. Google has said that its security is [14]not good enough and that Linux needs at least another 100 engineers. "I don't necessarily think that means that we just need to add more security people and that will solve it," said McGrath. "I do think that security will be more at the centre of the processes that we have. That's certainly going to be true at Red Hat. I think it will also be true in the open source communities where we will probable see more security being built into CI (Continuous Integration) pipelines."
Year of the Linux Desktop?
What about the areas where Linux has not broken through? There is the desktop, where Windows and macOS are more widely used, and perhaps more significantly, mobile; Android is proprietary, despite being built on Linux, and it is not a healthy situation from a free software perspective.
"If there were no Linux there would be no Android," said McGrath. "However, I don't think that Linux needs to be out for world domination. If I were to guess at some possible causes why Linux didn't take off in mobile, maybe we just had too much choice and spread ourselves too thin. I had a custom Android build on my phone for a time and I quickly dropped that because there's a point at which my technical interests are not more important than my ability to call someone during an emergency, or get my maps to work."
It is a point echoed by free software advocate Serge Wroclawski, who discusses [15]what is available and says: "While I want very much to be using one of these operating systems in the future, I could not recommend one of these devices for a 'regular person' at this point, and for myself, they're not capable of serving as my daily everyday device yet."
[16]
Those interested in tracing the 30-year history of Linux will find a timeline from Open Anniversary [17]here . Its most recent milestone is Google's release of Kubernetes in 2014. McGrath told us that containers are a big theme in what is happening with Linux today, and still very much in progress. "We're getting towards the middle of the container transition," he said. ®
Get our [18]Tech Resources
[1] https://opensource.org/licenses/gpl-2.0.php
[2] https://web.archive.org/web/20070826212454/http:/www.tlug.jp/docs/linus.html
[3] https://regmedia.co.uk/2021/08/25/redhat.jpg
[4] https://www.linux.co.cr/distributions/review/1994/1103.html
[5] https://www.redhat.com/en/blog/spooktacular-tale-red-hats-halloween-release
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/oses&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YSZpQIS4iJ2ZVLZAlfBsAAAAANc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[7] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/oses&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YSZpQIS4iJ2ZVLZAlfBsAAAAANc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[8] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/oses&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YSZpQIS4iJ2ZVLZAlfBsAAAAANc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/25/linux_kernel_30_years_old/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2020/05/19/wsl2_gui_linux_apps_windows/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/24/gnome_41_beta/
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/23/linux_5_14_rc7/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/18/asahi_linux_progress_apple_silicon/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/04/google_linux_kernel_security/
[15] https://blog.emacsen.net/blog/2021/08/23/floss-mobile-os-aug-2021/
[16] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/oses&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YSZpQIS4iJ2ZVLZAlfBsAAAAANc&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[17] https://anniv.co/Linux
[18] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
licensing technology
*free and good enough* is tough to beat.
Re: licensing technology
That's the problem. Good "enough", but never actually, objectively better than the proprietary counterparts.
[1]Especially in security.
[1] https://madaidans-insecurities.github.io/linux.html
Re: licensing technology
That statement has some problems. First, it is begging the question that people claim Linux IS more secure than the Microsoft or Darwin kernel. Not sure if many people claim that outright, there are patches, configurations, and SELinux that improve your generic kernel, which is oft for ease-of-use, not security.
My biggest complaint about your article is the cherry picking of examples. Sure you can find examples where proprietary kernels have potentially better security models. That is why climate deniers, anti-vaxxers can always trot out some idiot to argue the against the consensus that an university was foolish enough to give a PhD. Doesn't mean that those examples are not genuine security issues that need addressing. Proprietary kernels are black boxes; it is easy point out all of Linux's flaws but not see all the potential architecture problems or hacks that keep proprietary kernels operating.
Sidenote: does the Linux kernel even touch fonts? Microsoft pushing something to userland that should have never been in the kernel isn't a great flex.
So objectively? Incomplete information, I'll just stick best practices over relying on my kernel.
Re: licensing technology
free and better is even tougher to beat.
Linux is not an OS
Yes, what success Linux has had is down to GNU and the GPL, no question, but it is **NOT** an OS. It is a kernel. It is critically important to much of the world, but so are many other common components that form part of an actual, functioning OS.
OpenSSL, SSH, BASH and on and on and on.
Those get woven together to form working OS which allows people to get things done.
El Reg is meant to be a tech new site and it can't even get the most simple thing about Linus correct.
Yeesh.
Re: Linux is not an OS
About Linus or about Linux?
It's an OS - it operates the system.
The desktop or server environment on top is what provides SSL, a shell, software for specific connectivity.
Re: Linux is not an OS
You are correct. Linux is a kernel.
However all of those other parts making up the OS are available on Hurd (Kernel) and *BSD (operating system) too. However they still don't quite have the same popularity (though my myself am an avid BSD user). So arguably these extra components are less important to the popularity of GNU/Linux as a platform compared to a) kernel b) license.
So really the article talking about Linux specifically rather than all the userland "stuff" is relevant and makes sense in this context.
@karlkarl - Re: Linux is not an OS
BSD is even more liberal than GPL yet the installed base for *BSD compared to Linux is about the same as Linux compared to Windows. What would be the reason of GNU/Linux being so popular ?
Re: @karlkarl - Linux is not an OS
What would be the reason of GNU/Linux being so popular ?
Probably marketing and hardware support. The BSDs really didn';t have RH and other commercial support/distributions. And so Linux grew in popularity because you could buy it at the local computer outlet, and it (mostly) supported YOUR hardware. That kind of thing.
Sometimes that's all it takes.
Re: Linux is not an OS
Cobblers!
My pet peeve is people talking about an OS when they don't actually mean the OS, they mean the applications running on the OS. Bash - for example - has nothing to with the OS. It's an application. I can run Bash on my Windows PC, but that doesn't make it Linux.
The OS is - or should be - the kernel, the internal nuts and bolts, with next-to-no (or even just 'no') "things that a user can run". Because things that a user can run can - practically by definition - be replaced with "other things a user can run" and if you replace one such thing with another, that would obviously *not* mean you're now running a different OS.
Re: Linux is an OS
An OS controls higher level programs' access to the hardware. Linux does that. Bash is not an OS, it is a user program. SSH is not an OS, it is a user program.
Anything that has to ask Linux for resources or access is not part of the OS or it would do these things itself.
This is not a complicated concept.
Re: Linux is not an OS
Oooohh, look, a NIT to pick! pick, pick, pick, ...
That's kinda how I read that. [most nits aren't worth picking]
As for the article, I didn't realize Linux was already 30! I guess I've been using it since it was 12...
and a "well done" for the use of [L]GPLv2.* (I think many of us would be unhappy if it ever went to 3.*)
Re: Linux is not an OS
Even if Linus liked the idea, it's impractical. Linux is GPL2, not GPL2 or later. Imagine tracing everyone who has ever contributed to get their permission to relicence.
Re: Linux is not an OS
The polemic untertone of the TS and the downvotes he's received in turn nonwithstanding, his statement is factually true: Linux is not an OS, it's a component of an OS, a kernel. And that is not just a nitpick: it is the real reason why "Linux" was never widely adopted on the desktop.
For (leaving Android aside for the moment) "Linux" in the usual sense of the word, namely: the Linux kernel plus the GNU userland tools (and a few others) is in reality a /family/ of OSes, all of which are closely related enough to look "mostly the same" from the (Unix/Linux nerdy) end-user PoV but which in reality present a bewildering variety of ABIs that makes packaging /commercial/ applications for "Linux" a chore, particularly where end user apps with a GUI are concerned. And one which doesn't yield an attractive remuneration either, as, most software that is being used on GNU-Linux being FOSS, the average Linux nerd expects commercial applications on "Linux" to be cheaper rather than more expensive as compared with Windows and OSX. For a commercial developer "Linux" thus means: more effort for less ROI, or in other words: "Nah, not worth it"...
However, no OS can ever thrive on FOSS end user applications alone. That is a hard fact of life. And this is why "Desktop Linux" has remained a niche product. Sure, lately we've seen a plethora of novel packaging schemes where each application has to provide its very own userland runtime environment, either directly or by pulling in dependencies, the only viable option for portable applications in the Linux environment, apart from linking the whole damn thing statically on an ancient kernel version. But it's all too little, too late and still too balcanised to stand a real chance of becoming a game changer.
And there's another problem: There are use cases that require specific hardware drivers the implementation of which must remain a trade secret, such as operating high-end audio hardware, which is all but impossible in a GPL-licensed monolithic kernel. For high-performance GPUs at least, solutions exist, but I suspect those are only being tolerated because even the most radical GPL-Taliban want a good FPS-game from time to time...
Thus it turns out that the licensing (which created the distro balcanisation as well as the driver problem) is indeed responsible for both the success of "Linux" (in the server room) and its dismal failure (on the Desktop).
And Android? Well, Android does not have problem #1, as it is factually a proprietary OS (with a FOSS core component, just like OSX) and problem #2 is not really relevant on a smartphone, where you cannot swap out the GPU or attach an external high end audio interface. Which proves my point.
Feel free to vent your frustration by downvoting me, but know that it ain't gonna change a thing...
Linux on the desktop
I have been using Linux on the desktop (and laptop) for a number of years and I love it. However, in order to do that with CentOS 7, I had to "hack" things in order to use MATE desktop (Gnome 3 sucks!) and kernel-lt that supported certain hardware. Whilst M$ Windows off the DVD still needs drivers, consumers rarely see that, as shop-bought systems are usually ready to go. There has never been an easy path for consumers to migrate to something that was familiar. Another commenter on another thread is complaining about the case-sensitivity of *nix compared to Windows - something I have seen catching people out (web "developers" with spaces in their file names...).
There there is the lack of application support. iTunes for Linux, anyone? The software houses claim there is no demand, so they do not create a Linux version, which means you cannot use their software on Linux, which means there is no demand. Flatpak may be able to fill that gap. It has certainly helped me run the latest Skype, Signal, KiCAD, and OpenShot Video editor on CentOS 7. For other applications, I have had to use mock to rebuild upstream Fedora packages so I could use certain Amateur Radio applications in CentOS. I suspect Red Hat assume those who want to use those apps will just use Fedora, not an EL version on the desktop?!
And we have fragmentation. I have already stated my dislike for Gnome 3, and thankfully, others agreed and made MATE. With so much choice, it is really hard to create documentation, or tell a friend/relative over the phone to click on X, then Y, to sort something. This of course is also true for Windows with the UI constantly being screwed with!
And of course, we have to have the distro argument. Which do you use? Debian and its clones, or Red Hat and its clones. Different package management, different paths, different release and support cycles. I like to use the EL versions so it "just works". Unfortunately, the toys I want to play with are only available in the bleeding-edge versions, such as Fedora (speaking from a Red Hat perspective). So I have to go without, rebuild, or run it virtualised. A recent issue has stopped me dead in my tracks from trying to migrate to Rocky Linux 8. The rather handy 'mail-notification' utility is not available in EL8, as it needs libgnome-devel, which is deprecated (also an issue with Ubuntu, according to posts I have read). Attempting to rebuild it on a Rocky8 build VM, and I hit a wall where libgnome-devel requires compat-openssl10, and that refuses to build the -devel package, as it clashes with openssl-1.1.1. So I am stuck. No EL8 desktop for me at the moment. Do I go back to running Fedora to save on rebuilding the toys? The fedup upgrade utility is rather handy, and you can stay on the last supported version to try and avoid all the things that are borked, but you still have to use bleeding-edge Firefox, and they like to break add-ons! I am afraid it is of little use to suggest: "just switch to Debian". I have spent 20-odd years playing in the RH field, and trying to get my head around where things are in the Debian clones gives me a headache. Apologies to those who love and maintain Debian, but the path and packaging differences are another reason why M$ Windows remains the dominant "thing" on people's desktops and laptops.
Feel free to downvote. As a SysAdmin of 20+ years, I have seen lots of changes, not all for the better. I now simply want things to "just work" and not have to spend hours trawling through changelogs and forum posts to find someone decided to change how one package worked, and now my entire IT estate is on the fritz! I am looking at you systemd.
Re: Linux on the desktop
Upvoted because you correctly point out that Gnome 3 sucks. And also for systemd. That is just more shit to learn. It does not make things simpler. Bring back SysV init and Gnome 2. :-)
El Reg also points out there is [1]no place like GNOME: 41 is in beta (aka Gnome 4). Oh fuck.
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2021/08/24/gnome_41_beta/
Re: Linux on the desktop
That is just more shit to learn
I'm sure there are many 'SMUG's (Small Minded Useless Gits) who would twist this into a "you REFUSE to learn":comment of some kind, and then go on praising the glories of Gnome 3/4 and (the cult of) SystemD. (or Win-10-nic for that matter)
(Even though the rest of us understand that Gnome 3/4 and SystemD are NOT Linux)
Re: Linux on the desktop
From the article: "While I want very much to be using one of these operating systems in the future, I could not recommend one of these devices for a 'regular person' at this point, and for myself, they're not capable of serving as my daily everyday device yet."
I now simply want things to "just work"
As an IT Manager of 25+ years and IT professional for 35+ years I agree. Despite all the complaints for the most part Windows does "just work" and, more critically, users are used to it.
Re: Just works
I've been saying this for years here on El Reg , with very mixed opinion results.
80%+ of desktop users just want this thing to work. They not only have no idea how it works in the first place, they have no interest in finding out why it does. They just expect this machine to do what is expected of it.
Like a toaster. Or a microwave. Or their refrigerator. Or, for a lot of people, their car.
Devices are expected to work. The age of knowing why, and being able to repair it yourself when they don't, pretty much peaked decades ago.
Re: Just works
I switched a female relative's computer from Windows Vista to Devuan Linux a couple of years ago. Not only did it fix the thing so it worked well again, it did nearly everything it had done before (but better) and did not need replacing with a "New, Shiny" Win-10-nic machine. She knew very little about anything computer-related except using mail, web browsers, managing music files on an iPod nano, playing videos, and playing games. Well, some of the games she played as a kid were no longer available (but I offered to set up the games in a VM if she needed it, so far no).
Her successful OS paradigm transition took less than a day. Mate desktop helped. Everything just worked. It was an older Sony Vaio laptop, and I set it all up on a new hard drive. No problems since.
I would say that, for her, Linux is kinda like using a Mac. Switching from PC to Mac is generally painless (except for the bank account). Switching from Windows to Devuan+Mate, also pretty painless (and the hard drive needed replacing anyway, so no harm to bank account).
More people need to understand this.
Re: Linux on the desktop
The software houses claim there is no demand, so they do not create a Linux version
True, and yet there are still many Linux applications that are commercial.
Ohe of my observations is the way runtme and package linkage are too connected to the distro. You mention Flatpak which would attempt to rectify this. My preference: static linking. Then make updates (to THAT version) free if there are any important fixes later.
Probably the biggest obstacle to cross-platform is the use of "Micros~1 Shiny' as a framework. Old MFC applications could be adapted (using something similar to wxWidgets which is very MFC-like) as long as they're not using the latest 'Shiny". The 'Shiny' always has a lock-in effect to ONLY supporting Windows. And nobody who is SANE would want to use ''.Not" to start a new project (or to support an OLD one for that matter). LOTS of attempts to port games, etc. but Micros~1 still provides their "Shiny" to keep as many devs SOLELY on THEIR platform as possible...
(Seriously this should make Java even MORE popular, I would think)
25+ years and counting for me...
I came to Linux one night in 2016. I pushed the 'reset' button on my PC halfway through a bare metal Win98 install (3.5hrs in and counting)
Linux cames a cover CD from a UK PC magazine and I had it fully up and internet connected in 45mins
It's been "good enough" since then to be my main PC OS, (Windows been relegated to a VM box for at least 15 yrs)
All power to Linux for the future
Re: 25+ years and counting for me... I came to Linux one night in 2016.
What? Is it 2041 already?
How time flies. :-)
...
... or did you intenf to type "at", i.e.meaning shortly after quarter past eight in the evening?
Re: 25+ years and counting for me...
I came to Linux one night in 2016 . I pushed the 'reset' button on my PC halfway through a bare metal Win98 install (3.5hrs in and counting)
I'm guessing that should have been 20 0 6? I can't imagine why on earth anyone would be installing Windows 98 in 2016.
I hope it was at least 98 Second Edition...
Mike McGrath, Red Hat VP of Linux Engineering
Mike McGrath, IBM VP of Linux Engineering
FTFY.
Still have my original, official Yggdrasil distro
Doing some clearing out of the spare room during lockdown I found my original first edition Yggdrasil distro booklet, CD and floppy disk media from 1992!
Yggdrasil was the first commercial live distro ever made released, a 30 page booklet with bootable floppies and the CD, if you had one of the handful of CD drives that were compatible back then. I remember a mate gave it to me after a visit to a tech show where it he'd bought it discount for £30, he didn't have to time to play with it so he lent it to me and I never gave it back.
A little piece of Linux history I'm proud to own!
Re: Still have my original, official Yggdrasil distro
I wonder if there's anywhere to download these early versions? They'd make a good bit of nostalgia in bochs or wherever :)
Re: Still have my original, official Yggdrasil distro
[1]Archive.org, bless 'em.
[1] https://web.archive.org/web/19961227074653/http://yggdrasil.com/
Re: Still have my original, official Yggdrasil distro
Yep and my garage still has the millions of Slackware floppies -- well a handful if you exclude X.
Still have my Red Hat red hat
I got a red fedora when I bought RH 2.0 (?) on CDROM.
It has the old all-lowercase RH shadowman logo inside, and was apparently made by a company named "Lite Felt"
Apparently they're still a thing: https://www.millerhats.com/store/Lite-Felt-Hats/Lite-Felt-Fedoras
Re: Still have my Red Hat red hat
By chance I was once in someone's house and noted a red fedora on a hat stand. Apparently they had been in marketing a Red Hat in the UK previously. They knew less about computers and IT than my mother-in-law's dog, but they'd kept the hat!
They were please that I recognised the branding - which I suppose was the point of it!
I want things to "Just Work"
For the most part I run the installer (and users of certain other systems get to practice that quite a lot) and things do Just Work. What is really great is it then Just Continues To Work. Unlike some.
Although Bluetooth and WiFi are the worst faff I'd had the misfortune to endure in a very long time. What do most of the mundanes want? Right, most of them have never seen a network cable. Anyone working on the UI for those, please take a look around at the other OSs. Even if it's just Android. Biggest blocker as far as I can see.
Now I've said that, my personal desktops have been exclusively GNU/Linux since about 1997. It's almost always been capable of what I want from it, and it just keeps getting better. Anyone who has contributed to that, have my thanks and a few of the icon.
Late to the party
This article has made me realise I've only been a Linux user for about 20 years.... I can remember a friend at University had installed it, when it can only have been about 2 years old though. At the time, another friend's Hackintosh seemed much more exciting, and Java sounded like it was going to be amazing... although in my defence, I was never expecting to program anything, I'm a mechanical engineer who was learning C as part of his degree course at the time...