login
Search
I really don't feel these "historical" quotes add any value here.
Linus wanted to keep it simple from the start? Memory size increased dramatically over the last decades? So what?
This happened 16 years ago, and none of these quotes sheds any light on Linux as we know it in 2007.
Really, I'd like to be able to shut off any quote tagged as historical (and the Job board too, while I'm at it), as I only consider them as unnecessary noise.
Or at least, please make it stand clearly that these quotes date from an other era, so we don't get tricked in trying to make sense out of it until we realize it's outdated and completely meaningless as of today.
Don't get me wrong.
I enjoy KT.
I enjoy it so much that any change I don't agree with turns into a real disapointment.
These quotes are of interest
These quotes are of interest to me as I am a historian aswell.
They shed light on the changing nature of software development.
I want to understand how it was before and why it came to be as it is today, what values and concerns where of interest in its begining. Only reading a book or two or discussions of today on how the kernel performs its tasks in 2007 wont get you anywhere near the understanding you get if you consider why it has beocme the way it is.
btw, consider what the kernel would have been like if it had been developed with complexity as goal and 2gigs of memory available. my bet is it would turn into hurd.
I totally agree. This is a
I totally agree. This is a news site, historical quotes can be interesting, even enlightening sometimes, but they can also be used maliciously or inappropriately.