The problem is that it makes more work, in the long run, for everyone.
Google is surely developing some features that "we" would like; but even
more surely, "we" will continue to develop features that Google would like
(for one, compatibility with evolving hardware). If they have to keep
porting their modifications to newer kernels, it also makes more work for
them. If instead they get their work into the mainline, then most of the
work would be done for them. That's a pretty big win-win situation.
Hopefully they'll figure that out someday.
Posted Jul 9, 2009 13:17 UTC (Thu) by marcH (subscriber, #57642)
[Link]
> The problem is that it makes more work, in the long run, for everyone.
Sure, but: "in the long run we are all dead" (Keynes)
For some people months or even weeks is already a "long" run. And for financial markets it can even be days. GOOG?
Long term survival
Posted Jul 9, 2009 21:47 UTC (Thu) by man_ls (subscriber, #15091)
[Link]
The community always lives on. This is not just a rhetorical point; many people developing the Linux kernel were not doing it 10 years ago, many have moved on, and all of us benefit from the efforts put in the kernel since the beginning. (A community can also die, but while it lasts it doesn't depend on specific individuals.)
But it also works for the private enterprise. When a company looks just at the short term, and doesn't stop and see the big picture, then it tends to last that same short term. Such a position is understandable for a company which didn't exist 12 years ago, but we expect better from them.