And I think you underestimate the large businesses, led by financial institutions, who know a good price. Trouble really is that for business price matters more than anything else.

I think the GPLv3 does a better job of preventing this because it requires the machine to behave normally when you run your own modified version of the software (however the final GPLv3 toned this down to apply to only some devices). I can eventually see how without fighting against this, all GPLv? software will me taken and used however the manufacturer wants without revealing any of their modifications. DRM can be installed on all of what tomorrow may pass for PCs/general purpose computers.

Maybe others have an opinion on this.

I am wondering if Microsoft has some throw-away money to fund some student research that blends most of the Linux kernel with the Windows GUI and various other components exposing only Windows interfaces. I’ll call this Windows Z (TM).

Add Windows Z to the XBox-NG. There are some areas of the Linux kernel that need to be removed (eg, the scheduler). What the team does is to incorporate all of this Windows code that is not part of the Linux kernel into hardware. Only some XBox-NG specialty chips know about the Windows enhancement code. The special chip circuitry modifies the regular flow of instructions whenever certain addresses are required (firmware taylored for the specific kernel.org version and for the Windows enhancing code version). There are a few issues but most of the process manages to work fairly transparently since the most important Windows Z kernel core code runs from the Windows enhancement code on hardware and not from the Linux kernel.org code in main memory. A special mode even allows Linux apps to run on this system virtually natively off the unmodified Linux kernel.org code installed. The XBox-NG is capable of presenting a virtual machine that allows the unmodified kernel.org code to run as if it were running on a native x86 architechture.

Initially, this integration work is difficult, but ultimately the savings come in when Windows code has been reworked to fit in and use growth and advances on kernel.org kernels. We get a solid trusted computing environment that obsoletes x86 machines in many cases while providing the top quality XBox-NG media platform. Many savings in hardware costs would be had by the consumer.

An attractive project to many schools, I’d wager. A great way to put the great work of kernel.org to use on top hardware to manage the home. Linus might even be able to recommend someone to oversee some of these projects (the more successful ones, of course).

*********
I confess. I don’t like this idea, but the kernel is ripe for exploitation.

Are you aware of the fact that the original article was criticized for being flamebait, exaggeration, and a comment taken out of context? See:

http://boycottnovell.com/2007/07/15/dinformationweek-rebuttal/

Perhaps we ought to prefer to not to pay attention to InformationWeek anymore. They seem to have had an agenda for the past few months. It’s not just a personal observation. Other sites see this as well.

‘…Linux creator Linus Torvalds called advocates of the Free Software Foundation’s GPLv3 license “hypocrites.” A few readers complained I had not provided a complete picture of Torvald’s feelings. They were right. He also thinks FSF leaders are “controlling,” “condescending,” and full of “hot air.” And he’s got more choice words for GPLv3 itself.

In a series of postings on the Linux kernel mailing list under the thread ‘Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3′, Torvalds makes clear his distaste for the third version of the General Public License and its creators–a group led by the Free Software Foundation’s eccentric president Richard Stallman:

“The FSF crowd is vocal and opinionated, but it’s largely made up of people who talk more than they actually code. Hot air doesn’t make the world go round. Real code does,” Torvalds writes in one post in the thread.

“Now look at the people who try to sell the GPLv3 as the best thing since sliced bread. How many of those are people who actually get things done? I haven’t really seen a single one. Last I did the statistics, I asked the top 25-30 kernel developers about their opinion. NOT A SINGLE ONE preferred the GPLv3,” Torvalds states in another.

“The GPLv3 seems to attract people who make the wrong technical decisions,” Torvalds says in the thread…’

source: July 16 2007 InformationWeek http://www.informationweek.com/blog/main/archives/2007/07/the_linus_files.html

Thank you very much.

Sincerely and respectfully,

/s/chaosUnplugged

I think he’d get a lot further with the larger (business) community. Whether they might initially agree with the GPL3 or not.

MS used these “implementations” to prove that OOXML was implemented and used by competitors. They did that, eg, in the BIS Wordprocessing Markup language workgroup in India (a runup to the India ISO vote).

Except that companies that are PAID to implement OOXML based on a patent licensing agreement are not independend competitors.

Winter

Other sights that spring to mind are sidlings with Rob Enderle.

Maybe it was a case of wishful thinking.

nice article, but there is one error:
“Linspire is no longer on our side”

correct:
“Linspire has never been on our side, which they proved once more with this”

Linspire has always been a fan of LWindows.