[Previo por Fecha] [Siguiente por Fecha] [Previo por Hilo] [Siguiente por Hilo]
[Hilos de Discusión] [Fecha] [Tema] [Autor]Haro, Enrique wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > http://www.sunworld.com/sunworldonline/swol-08-1998/swol-08-torvalds.html > > > > > > Linus on Linux > > > > Java is dead, NT is next, and more. Linus speaks > > By Robert McMillan > > > > August 1998 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Abstract > > SunWorld Senior Editor Robert McMillan caught up with Linux creator > > Linus Torvalds recently to get his take on Sun, Linux, NT, and Java. And > > though we asked him, no, Linus would not say anything about his new job > > at the ultra-secretive Transmeta. (2,000 words) > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Linus Torvalds: I guess it counts as fairly hostile, mainly because a > > lot of the Linux users are fairly fed up with Microsoft. I mean, they > > wouldn't be Linux users otherwise. > > > > The users of Solaris tend to be Unix users. Most Linux users are ex-DOS > > or Windows users. And there are a lot of people there who really dislike > > Microsoft. But at the same time, most of the developers are certainly > > not anti-Microsoft. For example, me, I don't care. I think it's > > tasteless that they have such a strong market, but at the same time I've > > actually never been a Microsoft user myself. > > > > SW: Microsoft has said that they have no plans to port their > > applications -- Internet Explorer for example -- to Linux because there > > is no customer demand. Is that true? > > > > LT: That's not the reason, I'm fairly certain. They're doing HP-Unix > > versions. I mean, dream on. It's not because they think that HP-Unix > > people would like Internet Explorer. That's not the issue. > > > > The real reason is just that when you do a port to HP-Unix, you aren't > > porting to something that is in any way a rival. HP-Unix has absolutely > > nothing to do with Windows NT. It's politically the right thing to do. > > > > They very much know about Linux; and they very much don't want to port > > to it. And the reason they don't want to port to it is they know that on > > PCs, NT and Linux have about the same user base. > > > > SW: How big a threat is Linux to Windows NT? > > > > LT: I honestly don't know. But with NT you are already seeing signs of > > bad design -- like, NT 5.0 has been slipping for a while. From all I've > > heard, they have this behemoth that is so big, they couldn't get it to > > build reliably when people made changes. They definitely have problems > > maintaining a sane source base. > > > > SW: Linux has a large source base, too. How is it any better off than > > Windows NT? > > > > LT: A useful Linux distribution could be half the size of NT, but if you > > get a CD, it's probably 100 million [lines of code]. But the packages > > are independently developed, so they aren't a maintenance nightmare to > > each other. I don't care that GCC [GNU C Compiler] is a few hundred > > thousand lines of code, because it doesn't impact me. Microsoft has this > > one tree that they have to maintain. It shouldn't be a problem for them, > > but it obviously is. > > > > The kernel > > SW: It seems that a great deal of your work is devoted to keeping the > > Linux kernel clean. > > > > LT: For very selfish reasons, I don't want to clutter up the kernel > > because it makes it so hard to maintain. And nobody's ever been in that > > position, when it comes to NT. So what I think will happen is that in > > five years, Microsoft will come out with the `new-new' technology -- > > something completely new, because Windows NT will be where Windows 95 is > > right now, which is too complex and too fragile. Because nobody knows > > all of it, and it's really hard to maintain. I don't think NT gives you > > many benefits right now. The only benefit you get is that it runs most > > Windows programs. And assuming Wine [a Windows emulation package] starts > > working reliably, that benefit is gone. > > > > SW: A few years ago, Sun had visions of taking on Microsoft on the > > desktop. Is there anything to be learned by their failure? > > > > LT: One thing is that if you go after Microsoft, you don't do that by > > selling an expensive system. You need to give an NT person a reason to > > run your operating system. And Solaris was never that. Solaris was never > > something that a Windows person ever had any reason to switch to. It was > > way too expensive; it didn't give a Windows user much at all. It was > > completely unsupported, in reality, on PC hardware. Solaris x86 was > > there, but let's face it, it wasn't Solaris. > > > > Merced > > SW: How will Linux get ported to Intel's next-generation microprocessor > > architecture, Merced? > > > > LT: There are already people...for example at CERN, the European > > high-energy physics laboratory -- they are already using Linux to a > > large degree. All the CERN math libraries have been ported to Linux. And > > I know, for example, that they've already been talking to Intel, saying, > > "whatever happens, we want to run Linux on Merced too." > > > > The big thing, actually, is to port the GCC compiler to Merced. I > > suspect there probably is already some project somewhere. They're doing > > it under a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) at this point. When Merced is > > actually released, I suspect that within quite a short time frame you > > will find GCC for Merced. > > > > Probably what will happen is that, yes, we won't have Linux for Merced > > when Merced comes out, but I bet Linux will be running on Merced faster > > than most others [operating systems] within half a year. > > > > SW: Will Merced bring any major changes to Linux? > > > > LT: Linux is already 64-bit. It's actually the easiest 64-bit type, > > little endian, which is exactly what we have for Alpha right now. The > > EPIC-ness [Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computing] of Merced -- VLIW > > [Very-Long Instruction Word] as everybody else calls it -- is a problem > > for the compiler. It's a problem for the tool chain, but it's completely > > irrelevant to the kernel itself. It doesn't create any problems in that > > sense. > > > > SW: Tell us about the SMP (symmetric multiprocessing) work you've been > > doing on Linux. > > > > LT: That's what I've been working on for the last year or so. It's in a > > much nicer state right now. We still have things we know aren't at all > > optimal, but all the infrastructure is there. > > > > The only sane way to go from UP to SMP is to essentially force the > > kernel to run on only one CPU at a time. It can switch between CPUs, but > > it only runs on one at one specific time. Which means that you don't > > have to rewrite any of the kernel. You just have to rewrite the > > low-level entry points to the kernel and make sure that they lock each > > other out. It's really simple. > > > > SW: When will companies like Dell start selling Linux machines? > > > > LT: The only thing that will make one of the big companies pre-install > > [Linux] is just market. There's also pressure from certain obvious > > quarters not to do it. Even though it's probably not on paper, I suspect > > it's probably true that Microsoft doesn't like having other systems > > pre-installed. You probably need to have a very noticeable market to > > decide this. I think the point of no return is 10 to 15 percent of the > > market. We aren't there yet. We're closer to five. > > > > Small vendors already install Linux. At the point that one of the larger > > ones notices that it's losing sales to smaller ones, that's probably > > when it will start happening. > > > > Java is dead > > SW: What are your thoughts on Java? > > > > LT: I think everybody hates Java as a desktop thing. I see Java > > mentioned a lot lately, but all of the mentions within the last year > > have been of Java as a server language, not as a desktop language. If > > you go back a year and a half, everybody was talking about Java on the > > desktop. They aren't anymore. It's dead. And once you're dead on the > > desktop, my personal opinion is you're dead. If servers are everything > > you have, just forget it. Why do you think Sun, HP -- everybody -- is > > nervous about Microsoft? It's not because they make great servers. It's > > because they control the desktop. Once you control the desktop, you > > control the servers. > > > > It's no longer something that will revolutionize the industry. It could > > have revolutionized the industry if it was on the desktop, but I don't > > see that happening anymore. I hope I'm wrong. Really. I just don't think > > I am. > > > > SW: How did Sun blow it? > > > > LT: Too much noise, too much talk, too much discussion, not enough "show > > me." > > > > SW: So Sun's credibility is shot? > > > > LT: It's the credibility. It's also the fact that their implementations > > were bad. So you have people like HP who just decided that, "Hey, I can > > do a better implementation. I don't need Sun anymore." Or you have > > people like Microsoft who decide, "Okay, let's do our own extensions." > > And because the Sun implementation isn't good enough to carry Java on > > its own, the Microsoft extensions actually make sense to people. And > > it's just not compelling enough for anybody to switch. > > > > Sun has done this right in the past. Sun did it right with NFS. NFS > > became the standard because NFS was the only game in town at the time. > > It was freely available; things like that. NFS is a really crappy > > standard, but, I mean, it's there. And Java could have been a standard. > > But in order to get a standard that actually stands up to something, you > > have to get it onto enough machines that nobody can come in with a > > competing standard -- which means that you really have to execute on it. > > > > I could be wrong. There are people writing Java, but there are a lot of > > people who gave up on Java. I think Corel is the biggest example. > > > > Essentially I see the Java engine just slipping, not going anywhere. And > > I really hate that happening because Java could have been a big boost to > > Linux. > > > > SW: Didn't the Linux community have a difficult relationship with > > JavaSoft? > > > > LT: This is part of why I think Java has died. Instead of just > > leveraging off the Linux base that really wanted to have Java working, > > they just made it hard for the Linux base to get Java working. > > > > I know that there were people who had sources available and were able to > > do JVM [Java virtual machine] binaries. They all came out for Linux, but > > they came out two months late. And nobody got to play with the sources. > > Nobody got to fix the problems. So right now there are still people > > working on Java for Linux, but most of them seem to have given up on the > > Sun implementations. They're using Kaffe and writing their own > > libraries. > > > > The group in charge of Java at Sun had some licensing problems for the > > Linux version [of the Java Development Kit] and for two or three months > > it looked like the JDK from Sun wouldn't even be available. And that > > made a lot of Linux people really unhappy and pissed off at Sun. Those > > licensing fee issues were finally clarified, but the damage had been > > done. > > > > This answer is not here yet > > SW: What are you working on at Transmeta Corp.? > > > > LT: What they're actually doing is a secret. It's a hardware company, > > but they do have a software side. I can't answer any questions about > > Transmeta. > > > > SW: It's a long way from Finland, though. > > > > LT: I knew that the only way to actually force myself to actually write > > the thesis was to have a pressing reason to do so. I liked being at the > > university, but I wanted to do something else. I was kind of thinking > > that, `Hey, I want to see the commercial side, and maybe I'll go back to > > the university because I have enjoyed it.' But I at least want to see > > the other side of the fence. And now that I've seen the other side of > > the fence, I'm fairly certain I don't want to go back to the university. > > > > > > I really like working at a commercial company. You don't have to write > > papers. You actually get to code, which I really enjoy. And you have a > > very clear goal. You don't have to make up some goal to make grants. > > > > URL: http://www.sunworld.com/swol-08-1998/swol-08-torvalds.html > > Last modified: Thursday, September 03, 1998 > >
--- Begin Message ---
- Subject: Java is dead, NT is next, and more. Linus speaks
- From: "Haro, Enrique" <enrique haro en intel com>
- Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 09:54:48 -0700
> -----Original Message----- > http://www.sunworld.com/sunworldonline/swol-08-1998/swol-08-torvalds.html > > > Linus on Linux > > Java is dead, NT is next, and more. Linus speaks > By Robert McMillan > > August 1998 > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Abstract > SunWorld Senior Editor Robert McMillan caught up with Linux creator > Linus Torvalds recently to get his take on Sun, Linux, NT, and Java. And > though we asked him, no, Linus would not say anything about his new job > at the ultra-secretive Transmeta. (2,000 words) > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Linus Torvalds: I guess it counts as fairly hostile, mainly because a > lot of the Linux users are fairly fed up with Microsoft. I mean, they > wouldn't be Linux users otherwise. > > The users of Solaris tend to be Unix users. Most Linux users are ex-DOS > or Windows users. And there are a lot of people there who really dislike > Microsoft. But at the same time, most of the developers are certainly > not anti-Microsoft. For example, me, I don't care. I think it's > tasteless that they have such a strong market, but at the same time I've > actually never been a Microsoft user myself. > > SW: Microsoft has said that they have no plans to port their > applications -- Internet Explorer for example -- to Linux because there > is no customer demand. Is that true? > > LT: That's not the reason, I'm fairly certain. They're doing HP-Unix > versions. I mean, dream on. It's not because they think that HP-Unix > people would like Internet Explorer. That's not the issue. > > The real reason is just that when you do a port to HP-Unix, you aren't > porting to something that is in any way a rival. HP-Unix has absolutely > nothing to do with Windows NT. It's politically the right thing to do. > > They very much know about Linux; and they very much don't want to port > to it. And the reason they don't want to port to it is they know that on > PCs, NT and Linux have about the same user base. > > SW: How big a threat is Linux to Windows NT? > > LT: I honestly don't know. But with NT you are already seeing signs of > bad design -- like, NT 5.0 has been slipping for a while. From all I've > heard, they have this behemoth that is so big, they couldn't get it to > build reliably when people made changes. They definitely have problems > maintaining a sane source base. > > SW: Linux has a large source base, too. How is it any better off than > Windows NT? > > LT: A useful Linux distribution could be half the size of NT, but if you > get a CD, it's probably 100 million [lines of code]. But the packages > are independently developed, so they aren't a maintenance nightmare to > each other. I don't care that GCC [GNU C Compiler] is a few hundred > thousand lines of code, because it doesn't impact me. Microsoft has this > one tree that they have to maintain. It shouldn't be a problem for them, > but it obviously is. > > The kernel > SW: It seems that a great deal of your work is devoted to keeping the > Linux kernel clean. > > LT: For very selfish reasons, I don't want to clutter up the kernel > because it makes it so hard to maintain. And nobody's ever been in that > position, when it comes to NT. So what I think will happen is that in > five years, Microsoft will come out with the `new-new' technology -- > something completely new, because Windows NT will be where Windows 95 is > right now, which is too complex and too fragile. Because nobody knows > all of it, and it's really hard to maintain. I don't think NT gives you > many benefits right now. The only benefit you get is that it runs most > Windows programs. And assuming Wine [a Windows emulation package] starts > working reliably, that benefit is gone. > > SW: A few years ago, Sun had visions of taking on Microsoft on the > desktop. Is there anything to be learned by their failure? > > LT: One thing is that if you go after Microsoft, you don't do that by > selling an expensive system. You need to give an NT person a reason to > run your operating system. And Solaris was never that. Solaris was never > something that a Windows person ever had any reason to switch to. It was > way too expensive; it didn't give a Windows user much at all. It was > completely unsupported, in reality, on PC hardware. Solaris x86 was > there, but let's face it, it wasn't Solaris. > > Merced > SW: How will Linux get ported to Intel's next-generation microprocessor > architecture, Merced? > > LT: There are already people...for example at CERN, the European > high-energy physics laboratory -- they are already using Linux to a > large degree. All the CERN math libraries have been ported to Linux. And > I know, for example, that they've already been talking to Intel, saying, > "whatever happens, we want to run Linux on Merced too." > > The big thing, actually, is to port the GCC compiler to Merced. I > suspect there probably is already some project somewhere. They're doing > it under a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) at this point. When Merced is > actually released, I suspect that within quite a short time frame you > will find GCC for Merced. > > Probably what will happen is that, yes, we won't have Linux for Merced > when Merced comes out, but I bet Linux will be running on Merced faster > than most others [operating systems] within half a year. > > SW: Will Merced bring any major changes to Linux? > > LT: Linux is already 64-bit. It's actually the easiest 64-bit type, > little endian, which is exactly what we have for Alpha right now. The > EPIC-ness [Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computing] of Merced -- VLIW > [Very-Long Instruction Word] as everybody else calls it -- is a problem > for the compiler. It's a problem for the tool chain, but it's completely > irrelevant to the kernel itself. It doesn't create any problems in that > sense. > > SW: Tell us about the SMP (symmetric multiprocessing) work you've been > doing on Linux. > > LT: That's what I've been working on for the last year or so. It's in a > much nicer state right now. We still have things we know aren't at all > optimal, but all the infrastructure is there. > > The only sane way to go from UP to SMP is to essentially force the > kernel to run on only one CPU at a time. It can switch between CPUs, but > it only runs on one at one specific time. Which means that you don't > have to rewrite any of the kernel. You just have to rewrite the > low-level entry points to the kernel and make sure that they lock each > other out. It's really simple. > > SW: When will companies like Dell start selling Linux machines? > > LT: The only thing that will make one of the big companies pre-install > [Linux] is just market. There's also pressure from certain obvious > quarters not to do it. Even though it's probably not on paper, I suspect > it's probably true that Microsoft doesn't like having other systems > pre-installed. You probably need to have a very noticeable market to > decide this. I think the point of no return is 10 to 15 percent of the > market. We aren't there yet. We're closer to five. > > Small vendors already install Linux. At the point that one of the larger > ones notices that it's losing sales to smaller ones, that's probably > when it will start happening. > > Java is dead > SW: What are your thoughts on Java? > > LT: I think everybody hates Java as a desktop thing. I see Java > mentioned a lot lately, but all of the mentions within the last year > have been of Java as a server language, not as a desktop language. If > you go back a year and a half, everybody was talking about Java on the > desktop. They aren't anymore. It's dead. And once you're dead on the > desktop, my personal opinion is you're dead. If servers are everything > you have, just forget it. Why do you think Sun, HP -- everybody -- is > nervous about Microsoft? It's not because they make great servers. It's > because they control the desktop. Once you control the desktop, you > control the servers. > > It's no longer something that will revolutionize the industry. It could > have revolutionized the industry if it was on the desktop, but I don't > see that happening anymore. I hope I'm wrong. Really. I just don't think > I am. > > SW: How did Sun blow it? > > LT: Too much noise, too much talk, too much discussion, not enough "show > me." > > SW: So Sun's credibility is shot? > > LT: It's the credibility. It's also the fact that their implementations > were bad. So you have people like HP who just decided that, "Hey, I can > do a better implementation. I don't need Sun anymore." Or you have > people like Microsoft who decide, "Okay, let's do our own extensions." > And because the Sun implementation isn't good enough to carry Java on > its own, the Microsoft extensions actually make sense to people. And > it's just not compelling enough for anybody to switch. > > Sun has done this right in the past. Sun did it right with NFS. NFS > became the standard because NFS was the only game in town at the time. > It was freely available; things like that. NFS is a really crappy > standard, but, I mean, it's there. And Java could have been a standard. > But in order to get a standard that actually stands up to something, you > have to get it onto enough machines that nobody can come in with a > competing standard -- which means that you really have to execute on it. > > I could be wrong. There are people writing Java, but there are a lot of > people who gave up on Java. I think Corel is the biggest example. > > Essentially I see the Java engine just slipping, not going anywhere. And > I really hate that happening because Java could have been a big boost to > Linux. > > SW: Didn't the Linux community have a difficult relationship with > JavaSoft? > > LT: This is part of why I think Java has died. Instead of just > leveraging off the Linux base that really wanted to have Java working, > they just made it hard for the Linux base to get Java working. > > I know that there were people who had sources available and were able to > do JVM [Java virtual machine] binaries. They all came out for Linux, but > they came out two months late. And nobody got to play with the sources. > Nobody got to fix the problems. So right now there are still people > working on Java for Linux, but most of them seem to have given up on the > Sun implementations. They're using Kaffe and writing their own > libraries. > > The group in charge of Java at Sun had some licensing problems for the > Linux version [of the Java Development Kit] and for two or three months > it looked like the JDK from Sun wouldn't even be available. And that > made a lot of Linux people really unhappy and pissed off at Sun. Those > licensing fee issues were finally clarified, but the damage had been > done. > > This answer is not here yet > SW: What are you working on at Transmeta Corp.? > > LT: What they're actually doing is a secret. It's a hardware company, > but they do have a software side. I can't answer any questions about > Transmeta. > > SW: It's a long way from Finland, though. > > LT: I knew that the only way to actually force myself to actually write > the thesis was to have a pressing reason to do so. I liked being at the > university, but I wanted to do something else. I was kind of thinking > that, `Hey, I want to see the commercial side, and maybe I'll go back to > the university because I have enjoyed it.' But I at least want to see > the other side of the fence. And now that I've seen the other side of > the fence, I'm fairly certain I don't want to go back to the university. > > > I really like working at a commercial company. You don't have to write > papers. You actually get to code, which I really enjoy. And you have a > very clear goal. You don't have to make up some goal to make grants. > > URL: http://www.sunworld.com/swol-08-1998/swol-08-torvalds.html > Last modified: Thursday, September 03, 1998 >
--- End Message ---