He didn’t give up his fortune directly, because today he is a rich man. He just enriched with a different approach like opting to not lock the source code of his work like another guy we know well…
He would’ve definitely made more even as a senior employee in early Microsoft, IBM or any of the big Corps. Linux exists solely because he made it a collaborative endeavour from the start.
Linux exists solely because he made it a collaborative endeavour from the start.
That is the important part. If Linux had tried to compete with Microsoft as a closed-source operating system, no one would have used it – who would use a tiny, buggy (back then), incomplete, closed-source operating system made by a few guys in their spare time against a very popular, feature-complete, close-source operating system with billions of dollars funding its engineering effort?
What makes Linux popular is that it is collectively owned, that is as much a feature of the operating system as any technology or algorithm written into the source code itself. That feature is what set it apart from Windows or Mac OS.
I don’t think he ever expected fortunes, going off his famous usenet post. He just wanted a Unix-like OS that wasn’t Minix and didn’t cost exactly one space shuttle. One that he could fuck around and do anything he wanted with without regard for someone else’s license and restrictions.
Everyone else wanting one too was a happy accident.
No, but they were very adamantly against the sharing of ms basic which was their big product (before dos), at a time when software sharing was fairly common.
He didn’t give up his fortune directly, because today he is a rich man. He just enriched with a different approach like opting to not lock the source code of his work like another guy we know well…
But I like him anyway
He would’ve definitely made more even as a senior employee in early Microsoft, IBM or any of the big Corps. Linux exists solely because he made it a collaborative endeavour from the start.
That is the important part. If Linux had tried to compete with Microsoft as a closed-source operating system, no one would have used it – who would use a tiny, buggy (back then), incomplete, closed-source operating system made by a few guys in their spare time against a very popular, feature-complete, close-source operating system with billions of dollars funding its engineering effort?
What makes Linux popular is that it is collectively owned, that is as much a feature of the operating system as any technology or algorithm written into the source code itself. That feature is what set it apart from Windows or Mac OS.
I don’t think he ever expected fortunes, going off his famous usenet post. He just wanted a Unix-like OS that wasn’t Minix and didn’t cost exactly one space shuttle. One that he could fuck around and do anything he wanted with without regard for someone else’s license and restrictions.
Everyone else wanting one too was a happy accident.
I’m out of the loop, who are you referring to?
Mr.Redmond
Ahh, I thought it was somebody else you were talking about since DOS was never open source
It was about ms basic at the time I believe.
Interesting, so they had an open source product back then?
No, but they were very adamantly against the sharing of ms basic which was their big product (before dos), at a time when software sharing was fairly common.