Linux Vs. Microsoft

[mfarquhar]

i know there there is a kind of "feud" going on between linux users and Microsoft, but someone asked me whether microsoft can begin using it's own version of linux

under the GPL this seems possible as long as the release the source code
\
any thoughts on this

[chimera]

They could create a commercial distribution like Redhat and never release the source, couln't they?

[commodore]

I think redhat sells it's source. By the GPL the source can't cost more than the compiled version (binary??).

[poofyhairguy]

i know there there is a kind of "feud" going on between linux users and Microsoft, but someone asked me whether microsoft can begin using it's own version of linux


Yes they could. Would they?

I think that MS would prefer to get out of the OS business first. It did not lose billions on the Xbox for nothing.

[Koybe]

I think redhat sells it's source.
RedHat only sells services and compiled OS. The source are free otherwise they wouldn't follow the GPL. You can found some RedHat source-based distribution like CentOS, Tao Linux and many more...

Then this is answering the first question too. Microsoft can't go on the linux source code to make a system as it will caus a license problem. And anyway, they won't drop windows... be sure ;)

[BSDFreak]

i know there there is a kind of "feud" going on between linux users and Microsoft, but someone asked me whether microsoft can begin using it's own version of linux

under the GPL this seems possible as long as the release the source code
\
any thoughts on this

NT isn't as far from *nix as people think it is, the have made it unusually complicated, that is all, now MS has a pure *nix implementation in their history called Xenix, does any of this man that they would go FOSS, no, of course not, they will make money from their OEM contracts for as long as they can, don't think for a second that and OEM wouldn't opt to install FOSS is it would actually make more money, so far, few offer it.

Here in Europe we are getting such requests though.

[mfarquhar]

i have also heard that XBOX runs on linux (no individual licences) is this true:?:

[prizrak]

I'm sure MS uses alot of FOSS stuff in their development they just don't tell you. This is the thing about closed source you can't prove they violated the license since you don't see the code.

[mstlyevil]

i have also heard that XBOX runs on linux (no individual licences) is this true:?:

If I am not mistaken, they use a version of WinXP on the Xbox 360. The old Xbox could be modded to run Linux, but I do not think they actually use it as the primary OS.

[prizrak]

If I am not mistaken, they use a version of WinXP on the Xbox 360. The old Xbox could be modded to run Linux, but I do not think they actually use it as the primary OS.
No it wasn't Linux based, probably a variation of Windows.

[Imexius]

Actually microsoft has its own unsuccesful linux distro called lindows.

[zenwhen]

Actually microsoft has its own unsuccesful linux distro called lindows.


That is untrue. Michael Robertson, founder and CEO of MP3.com was reponsible for Lindows, which is now referred to as Linspire (http://linspire.com/).

Proof:
http://www.linspire.com/lindows_about_profiles.php

[briancurtin]

Actually microsoft has its own unsuccesful linux distro called lindows.
even though it is untrue, if it was true: why would microsoft have a problem with the name "lindows" if they were the ones that created it? microsoft is the reason "linspire" is the current name of the former "lindows" distro.

[mstlyevil]

even though it is untrue, if it was true: why would microsoft have a problem with the name "lindows" if they were the ones that created it? microsoft is the reason "linspire" is the current name of the former "lindows" distro.

Their settlement with MSFT is the reason why they are the only Linux Distribution to legally include the Win32 codecs.

[briancurtin]

i was just talking about the name, but ok.

[Imexius]

I heard that lindows doesnt have a root password by default... already that sounds like crap.

[prizrak]

I heard that lindows doesnt have a root password by default... already that sounds like crap.
Not sure about the password but in Linspire you run as root by default Windows style. It's a really crappy distro and not a very popular with anyone but Walmart.

[JimmyJazz]

I heard lindows charges for free open source software too (well that is charges to install it which is just as good for most newbies). Anyhow I find that quite lame.

[aysiu]

I heard lindows charges for free open source software too (well that is charges to install it which is just as good for most newbies). Anyhow I find that quite lame. The GPL allows people to charge for open source software.

[zenwhen]

I heard lindows charges for free open source software too (well that is charges to install it which is just as good for most newbies). Anyhow I find that quite lame.

In my opinion, there is nothing lame about it.

Free does not stand for price. As long as the source is made available for all of the GPL packages, there is nothing unethical about selling free software. It is in fact a wonderful things for Linux because it legitimizes us in the enterprise sector. If there isn't a price tag involved, most companies won't touch it. Same with a lot of consumers. They offer these people what they want.

I will add though, that Linspire really is probably the most insecure Linux distro out there.

[aysiu]

I will add though, that Linspire really is probably the most insecure Linux distro out there. For the curious, it's because Linspire defaults to making the first user the root user and does not encourage you to make more than one user.

If you don't believe me, see the attached screenshot.

I, too, see nothing wrong with charging for software. I do think it's quite lame for Linspire to be a Debian-based distro but essentially disable apt-get. There are hacks to enable apt-get in Linspire, but they're not really practical.