LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 06-10-2003, 09:47 PM   #1
GtkUser
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Canada
Distribution: Redhat 9.0
Posts: 637

Rep: Reputation: 30
The Most Powerful Feature Of Linux


The fact that Linux is more decentralized than closed source platforms. For example, you have a decent product with Win2k Professional (as long as you don't hate Microsoft) because you can download tons of pirated software and music from kazaa. Most home users have everything that they want, and they have more than Linux users as far as PC entertainment goes. The only problem though is that the Microsoft platform is closed source, and what that boils down to is centralized control. The users of Win2k have to stay with that platform, they can not upgrade. The users can not work with the source code to further development, it's not possible. If this platform had been Linux, than there is no single company that controls the platform, rather it is decentralized. The Linux platform could be taken by a group of about a couple hundred people, anywhere in the world, and it can be upgraded, no matter what goverment or industry says, the fact is that government or industry does not have control over Linux because the control is decentralized, it belongs to the users.

The only thing holding Linux back is lack of software. There is only one more thing, it's also quality of software architecture, because the Linux kernel is a large project, it's not possible for one human to maintain, but rather takes a couple hundred people to maintain it. That's why it is so important for Linux to work with the best technology, and I still feel that the best architecture is an object oriented one.

My case for object oriented technology is reflected in the real world that we live in. When I drop a glass on the floor and that glass breaks, this does not mean that the whole world breaks. The complex world uses objects that encapsulate behavior and do not have too much responsibility for the whole world attached to them. If this were the focus of software, than one should think that software would be able to handle as much complexity as we have in the real world. This kind of architecture would also assist Linux to become even more decentralized, than it would be impossible for one organization to control Linux.

That's what is happening right now with the SCO, they are trying to own Linux. Well IBM doesn't own Linux, Redhat doesn't own Linux, SUSE doesn't own Linux. Don't forget that. Even if all of the organization dissappeared, Linux should be able to continue because it's users own it, but it would be even easier if the platform architecture were more decentralized.

Last edited by GtkUser; 06-10-2003 at 09:53 PM.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 10:37 PM   #2
zmedico
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Location: Mission Viejo, California, USA
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 707

Rep: Reputation: 30
Smile Re: The Most Powerful Feature Of Linux

Quote:
Originally posted by GtkUser
object oriented technology is reflected in the real world that we live in.
Totally. OOP is cool.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 10:57 PM   #3
fancypiper
Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Sparta, NC USA
Distribution: Ubuntu 10.04
Posts: 5,141

Rep: Reputation: 58
It's design philosophy is what I think

One simple tool that does one task simply and reliabilibly piped to another simple tool that does that task simply and reliabilibly, etc not one giant program doing all things.

This runs on a well designed base (the kernel) with excellent file handling for an awesome set of filesystems and memory management and real multi-tasking capabilities that can be run on a stock install or tailor made to your design for your hardware.

To boot, it was designed with the internet in mind, so is designed for that environment, and not a kludge of a kludge of a 16 bit not worth one bit etc.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 11:07 PM   #4
zmedico
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2002
Location: Mission Viejo, California, USA
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 707

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by fancypiper
One simple tool that does one task simply and reliabilibly piped to another simple tool that does that task simply and reliabilibly, etc not one giant program doing all things.
And if the task isn't so simple, make it an independent module if possible. Don't create unnecessary dependencies.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 11:11 PM   #5
davidbush
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2003
Location: Macomb, IL
Distribution: Fedora Core 1 and Slackware 9.1
Posts: 9

Rep: Reputation: 0
I agree that Linux's decentralization is one of it's greatest strengths. I like the fact that it is not owned by one organization because it means that the organization alone cannot determine the future of it. I have heard many times the argument for open source and Linux that it means you aren't left out to dry if an organization decides to move on and not support a product anymore, but I never really thought about it. A while ago, I did some VB 6 coding for a doctor and had a tough time trying to find some resources. Just a few weeks ago, this doctor told me that he had to move on from VB 6 to something else because it wasn't being supported anymore. He wasn't even done with the project and now he is in this situation. That made me really appreciate Linux and decide to move past the "I want to try out Linux" stage and go to the "I want to switch to Linux and give it my support" stage. Being a newbie, it may be a while before I can support it though.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 11:11 PM   #6
2damncommon
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Calif, USA
Distribution: Debian Wheezy
Posts: 2,839

Rep: Reputation: 48
Quote:
The only thing holding Linux back is lack of software.
Huh?
I think you spelled "The type of software I prefer is not available on Linux" wrong.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 11:17 PM   #7
GtkUser
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Canada
Distribution: Redhat 9.0
Posts: 637

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
The battle of action based architecure versus object oriented architecture seems to provide these results.

- Action based technology has less overhead so it runs faster.
- Object oriented technology allows the project to have less dependancies for a couple reasons, since implementation is encapsulated, it is easier to upgrade, change, and test, and it is more friendly for large groups to work together on separate components that later become integrated.

I fall into the later camp because I think that it's better to have a more flexible and organic architecture than one that has centralized data structures.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 11:18 PM   #8
fancypiper
Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Sparta, NC USA
Distribution: Ubuntu 10.04
Posts: 5,141

Rep: Reputation: 58
Quote:
Originally posted by davidbush
IA while ago, I did some VB 6 coding for a doctor and had a tough time trying to find some resources. Just a few weeks ago, this doctor told me that he had to move on from VB 6 to something else because it wasn't being supported anymore. He wasn't even done with the project and now he is in this situation. That made me really appreciate Linux and decide to move past the "I want to try out Linux" stage and go to the "I want to switch to Linux and give it my support" stage. Being a newbie, it may be a while before I can support it though.
Heh, heh, you may just be suprised!

Is he a family practice physician? TK Family Practice even has a Knoppix Live version that runs off a CDROM, I have heard.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 11:19 PM   #9
fancypiper
Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Sparta, NC USA
Distribution: Ubuntu 10.04
Posts: 5,141

Rep: Reputation: 58
Perhaps you have to make one with a quick glance at the post

http://lists.debian.org/debian-med/2.../msg00026.html

Last edited by fancypiper; 06-10-2003 at 11:22 PM.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 11:25 PM   #10
moeminhtun
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Singapore
Distribution: Fedora Core 6
Posts: 647

Rep: Reputation: 30
Right. Linux kernel should be re-written with C++. For those who are not convinced, try study the architecture and programming of the Symbian OS which is written in C++ and good OOP design. It is too damned good. It provides frameworks and dynamically load the modules, of course which could only be done by OOP.

(Symbian is currently running on the Nokia 3650, 7250 and communicators, and some other siemens and sony erricsons)

Last edited by moeminhtun; 06-10-2003 at 11:28 PM.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 11:27 PM   #11
GtkUser
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Canada
Distribution: Redhat 9.0
Posts: 637

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by davidbush
I agree that Linux's decentralization is one of it's greatest strengths. I like the fact that it is not owned by one organization because it means that the organization alone cannot determine the future of it. I have heard many times the argument for open source and Linux that it means you aren't left out to dry if an organization decides to move on and not support a product anymore, but I never really thought about it. A while ago, I did some VB 6 coding for a doctor and had a tough time trying to find some resources. Just a few weeks ago, this doctor told me that he had to move on from VB 6 to something else because it wasn't being supported anymore. He wasn't even done with the project and now he is in this situation. That made me really appreciate Linux and decide to move past the "I want to try out Linux" stage and go to the "I want to switch to Linux and give it my support" stage. Being a newbie, it may be a while before I can support it though.
When you purchase a closed source platform you don't really own it, but it's more like you are renting it. The reason for this, as you said above, when the vendor decides to stop supporting the libraries, than people are forced to move on. It's also in the vendors interest to move on, because the vendor wants to keep making money.

With open source it's a little different, because you are the owner, but since you are the owner, it's more like an investment. You have to provide some down payment but ultimately you have something in the end, the users of Linux have more control over the direction of the platform, and it is in their interest to continue to support their libraries.

The point that I'm trying to make is that the LInux architecture is not organic enough, it is too centralized architecturally. It would be less centralized if objects shared responsibilities for the implementation. This would benefit the architecture by making it more flexible and decentralized. It's in the nature of open source. The source code decentralizes ownership of the platform, but the architecture is still a vendor architecture, it's not decentralized. Instead centralized data structures and separate behavior create dependancies. The behavior and the data should be encapsulated.

Last edited by GtkUser; 06-10-2003 at 11:30 PM.
 
Old 06-10-2003, 11:41 PM   #12
cuckoopint
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 797

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Right. Linux kernel should be re-written with C++. For those who are not convinced, try study the architecture and programming of the Symbian OS which is written in C++ and good OOP design. It is too damned good. It provides frameworks and dynamically load the modules, of course which could only be done by OOP.
The counter-argument is that it should be written in assembly for speed. Hence, we're getting the best of two worlds. IMO, a "base" does not need to be dynamically updated. then, it loses the meaning of a foundation. Anything that needs to be dynamically changed should be at a higher level (which may then be OOP).
 
Old 06-10-2003, 11:57 PM   #13
moeminhtun
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Singapore
Distribution: Fedora Core 6
Posts: 647

Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by cuckoopint
The counter-argument is that it should be written in assembly for speed. Hence, we're getting the best of two worlds. IMO, a "base" does not need to be dynamically updated. then, it loses the meaning of a foundation. Anything that needs to be dynamically changed should be at a higher level (which may then be OOP).
I think the base also needs it. For example if the kernel is written in OOP, it would be possible that you can add new features, protocols, drivers, new support module for certain hardware without modifying and even re-compiling the kernel, just write the libraries and install it. That would not be the case like right now, if we want some new features or support for some hardware we have to wait for the new kernel release. This is very much necessary today. The speed is not that significant anymore in today's processors, getting faster and faster. The prove is that, as I mentioned earlier, the "Symbian OS", which is totally written in C++ and OOP, run very well even on the limited embedded platforms, and you can add your own messaging protocol, libraries, device drivers or whatever modules (as the end programmer, not the vendor) which can't be done in other embedded platform like PalmOS.

Last edited by moeminhtun; 06-11-2003 at 06:14 AM.
 
Old 06-11-2003, 12:25 AM   #14
GtkUser
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Canada
Distribution: Redhat 9.0
Posts: 637

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Quote:
Originally posted by cuckoopint
The counter-argument is that it should be written in assembly for speed. Hence, we're getting the best of two worlds. IMO, a "base" does not need to be dynamically updated. then, it loses the meaning of a foundation. Anything that needs to be dynamically changed should be at a higher level (which may then be OOP).
If the kernel were implemented in assembly than it would be tied to a specific hardware architecture. it would not be flexible and the hardware vendors could control the platform, just think of Palladium for an example. Linux users can run Linux on Sparc or other architectures, they can shift architectures, but that would not be possible if you worked with assembly, not without a hell of a lot of work, it is just not portable. In addition, it would be nearly impossible to work on the implementation in groups, because everyone would be stepping on each others toes for all of the dependancies.

If you really really wanted to work with assembly than I would suggest using objects, however implementing the object methods (whos implementation is encapsulated) in assembly.
 
Old 06-11-2003, 12:39 AM   #15
GtkUser
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2002
Location: Canada
Distribution: Redhat 9.0
Posts: 637

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 30
Linux users can't afford to be naive anymore about their platform. The priority of open source technology should be decentralized control.

Speed is nothing if you don't have any control! What good is a race car to a driver who loses control and drives strait into a brick wall.

The fact that the source code is given out freely under the GPL means that people have the ability to develop the platform independently however that platform is based on vendor technology, an action based, centralized architecture. It is not organic, it is not flexible.

Last edited by GtkUser; 06-11-2003 at 12:42 AM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Most powerful 2D graphics editor for Linux??? ivancauso Linux - Software 2 08-11-2005 09:07 AM
Favourite feature of linux?? mikeymorgan Linux - General 21 06-24-2005 08:26 AM
Future Linux feature request !! my-unix-dream Linux - Newbie 4 04-30-2005 03:56 PM
Powerful Linux for you...... avols143 Linux - Distributions 3 02-21-2004 04:16 PM
which linux is the most powerful? indy317 Linux - Distributions 12 06-03-2003 05:14 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:21 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration