What is Digg?53 Comments
- schestowitz, on 10/10/2007, -11/+63-Linux gives Google its protection from Microsoft Windows.-
Without Linux, Google would be nowhere. - jessejoedotcom, on 10/10/2007, -5/+28His point is that without the FREE cost of Linux, Google wouldn't have been able to afford how big they are now. Can you imaging them paying a Windows license for the millions of servers they have out there?
- naterpoke, on 10/10/2007, -1/+23i wish more companies were like google. it would make the internet easier for my mom and grandpa
- Roger, on 10/10/2007, -2/+20Great, yet another reason to love Google.
- nodonoug, on 10/10/2007, -1/+16They couldn't have done that when they started.
- GMorgan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+13This is major. Patents are *the* issue, we've had companies aid OSS before but we have yet to see any mass movement on the patent front.
- DangerCollie, on 10/10/2007, -2/+14Hehe. Suck it, Ballmer.
- robojerk, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11I doubt Google had the man power or resources to just write up their own OS when they first launched. I agree that other options were available to them like BSD but they choose linux..
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10How Frikken cools is this. Even the biggest patent holder in the universe sees GPL as necessary to software development. Why do people not understand that programming is just another language like Spanish, English, Chinese and all the rest....language should not be patentable!
- AlexFerny, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Err .. It comes from people who the companies employ to contribute to the kernel. Most of these people were contributing before they were employed by the top companies, but now they can do so far more due to getting paid to do it.
- derwarnochfrei, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7The thing is: Patents on ideas alone, without product are already a bad thing. Googles move is OK, but it obscures that thought patents have to stop. and they will stop one time (i have a dream...), just as dealing with knowledge had to be taken out of the hand of the catholic church in europe. we've had it all already through, just use history...
- Jacob, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7yes their very own version of ubuntu linux
- xaxxon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4The point is the choice isn't Linux or Windows. Theres plenty of alternatives out there they could have chosen instead. At no point did they have to use Linux. Or Windows.
- xaxxon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3IBM is the biggest patent holder, by the way..
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -5/+8you are stupid on so many levels.
- cantormath, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3GO GOOGLE!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Nanobe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Google uses Goobuntu for a lot of its desktop machines (they have plenty of Windows and Mac desktops too), and some heavily customized form of Linux for its servers. I've never heard that it uses Red Hat for its servers, and I'd be surprised if they did (since Red Hat, you know, costs money, and Google has always tried to build their infrastracture on the most inexpensive hardware and software available).
- amfantasy, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4I believe Google uses Red Hat on their servers so its no free lunch
- specialK16, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4OSS is just a decision, whether you want to make your software Open Source or not. If you want fine, but if you don't; if you've developed something you know you can make serious money with, or something that took you a long time and effort, then you have to right to make it propietary software and sell it, no one has to bash you because of that.
- PhonicUK, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2"The company also uses an Ubuntu-based Linux distribution, known as Goobuntu, on its internal desktops."
Mmm Hmm... - thegrott, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I must admit I was losing a bit of faith in google with some of their questionable business/data decisions recently...
This more than makes up for it! Go google, not letting greed get in the way of advancement, for the greater good :) - redwire, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Its existance isn't in doubt, its existance is not kept secret:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goobuntu
http://www.flickr.com/photos/7747894@N05/530284454/
The probable reason is has never been leaked is:
1. Its Ubuntu with a few mods mostly aesthetic.
2. The non-aesthetic stuff is probably hooked to internal stuff that is thin client style and utterly useless to anyone external. - spltimg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3This is a direct hit against Microsoft... I for one welcome another official entry into the Linux army. It just gives users another strong choice.
- Rickler, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3As is yours. Copying and improving is what we do best and have been doing since the wheel. Patents and copyrights no longer serve the people as they once were intended.
- harlowsmonkeys, on 10/10/2007, -15/+16Nonsense. They'd be on *BSD, or a commercial Unix, or even on Windows servers. Do you really think Google's code won't run on other operating systems?
- JonForTheWin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1>His point is that without the FREE cost of Linux, Google wouldn't have been able to afford how big they are now.
http://openbsd.org
http://freebsd.org - JonForTheWin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1>This is not what they run on their servers.
. . and? Their desktops, the machines they do er a uh, WORK with, the business doesn't depend on them at all? - oobuntu, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2I wonder about this Goobuntu myth. If it exists why has no one (ex-employee or otherwise) leaked the Goobuntu distro onto the internet yet?
- nodonoug, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3It's called 'reply'. Use it, troll.
- schestowitz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Yes, I know they could use *BSD. Generalise my statement to say "without Free software".
- ilovenicotine, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The first one, but it means that we can use their patents in Linux...
- JonForTheWin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1>"Linux" is a term used by non-technical people
Now for a version of that sentence without the *****:
"Linux" is a term used by people who are wrong. - ToadLeg, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2As much as some of the top coders of GNU and Linux don't like it, "Linux" is a term used by non-technical people to describe the entire system because it's simpler than "GNU/Linux operating system". How some top coders want terms to be used so that they are very technical and specific (and because of the different histories of GNU and Linux) does not change the meaning of the word, and does not make "Linux" an inaccurate way to describe "the GNU/Linux operating system".
- Xilon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Linux IS the kernel... no need to have "Linux kernel", "Linux" is fine. GNU/Linux is the WHOLE operating system, including applications, which Google is NOT protecting, and afaik they aren't under threat from Windows, the kernel is.
- JonForTheWin, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1So your song would be proprietary. MY song would be under the GPLv3.
Patents are NOT the same as copyright. YOUR logic is what's *****. - JonForTheWin, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1>No, I'm pretty sure you can boot linux without anything GNU at runtime.
That's right, you can boot it with *BSD's stuff.
But with nothing at all, it's _not_ an operating system. - Stonekeeper, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1I used FreeBSD once. I'm still using the cream...
- Akiha_Tohno, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1As much as I agree, I have several dictionaries in different languages that claim there are "trademarked" words inside that require licenses, so words can just as easily be trademarked and copyrighted.
- xaxxon, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2No, I'm pretty sure you can boot linux without anything GNU at runtime. Not saying it would be that useful, just that there is such a thing as the "Linux Operating System". It's a Linux/GNU SYSTEM, not OS.
- xaxxon, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1read what you posted: "ON ITS INTERNAL DESKTOPS". This is not what they run on their servers.
- KongKNoob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0I wouldn't say it makes up for it, but it helps... Now they're only 10 % evil.
- iumentum, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0So is it saying Google promises not to sue Linux infingements on their personal patents only? Or are they offering to foot the bill against a legal battle between MS Vs. X distro as well?
- NoTiG, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4I am a linux fanboy and I would have to agree
- AlexFerny, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3Article description is inaccurate .. either its "Linux kernel" or "GNU/Linux operating system".
- RandomHuman0111, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1Google is the Ron Paul of interweb companies.
- PhonicUK, on 10/10/2007, -4/+3No, please don't.
- altjeringa, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5Without the contributions made by companies such as IBM, Intel, HP and others the linux kernel would still be a sad sick joke that could only run semi-efficiently on 1 processor.
The Linux community is mostly corporate these days. All the serious advancements come from corporate contributors. So stop being silly. - Anpheus, on 10/10/2007, -5/+3Yeah, it's a good thing FreeBSD and all the other *BSDs aren't free.
- nodonoug, on 10/10/2007, -3/+1The language is not patentable. But I'm pretty sure copyright/trademark infringement covers what you make with the language. On your analogy, my software program would be like writing a song or a speech. If I want to reserve the rights, you have to get my permission before reproducing it. I'm a fan of OSS, but your analogy is inherently flawed.
- ShogunWarPig, on 10/10/2007, -7/+2God bless us...... everyone
-
Show 51 - 54 of 54 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is