Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com) [LWN.net]

News.com has a long look at the ADTI report and an interview with its author. "In an interview conducted for the study, [Andrew] Tanenbaum said Minix 'was the base that Linus used to create Linux. He also took many ideas from Minix, including the file system, source tree and much more. If Linux is a derivative work of Minix, that makes Linux vulnerable to charges of intellectual property infringement by Prentice Hall, which published books and the Minix source code but restricted its use until 2000, the study said. 'Arguably, Prentice Hall has lost out on tens of millions of dollars' because of lost book sales, the study said."

In this context, it is more than worthwhile to read this posting by Andrew Tanenbaum about the whole thing. "Thus, of course, Linus didn't sit down in a vacuum and suddenly type in the Linux source code. He had my book, was running MINIX, and undoubtedly knew the history (since it is in my book). But the code was his. The proof of this is that he messed the design up.... My conclusion is the Ken Brown doesn't have a clue what he is talking about. I also have grave questions about his methodology."

(Log in to post comments)

If ATDI follows their tradition....

Posted May 20, 2004 13:58 UTC (Thu) by rknop (guest, #66) [Link]

....they will take this posting from Tanenbaum and put out a press release:

"Andrew Tanenbaum, Creator of Primary Inspriation for Linux, says Design of Linux Fundamentally Insecure!"

The text will be filled with information about Linux not being a microkernel and how big a mistake that is.

Nowhere will they mention that Tanenbaum uses the security problems Windows has as his primary experimental evidence for his assertion.

This Ken Brown guy sounds like a loser. Unfortunately, coming from ADTI, he'll have the Corporate Stamp on him, and the suits are more likely to believe what he's saying than the much more reasoned words of Tanenbaum, who is after all a computer geek and thus has no clue about Real Business or some such nonsense.

-Rob

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 20, 2004 14:28 UTC (Thu) by chel (guest, #11544) [Link]

Most of the parts of writing an OS are quite trivial. To do it right, some parts are cuxial. Linux and Andrew T lived in different parts of the galaxy if you look at these essential parts. Saying "Linux is a derivative work of Minix" is utterly nonsense. Both the father of Linux and the father of Minux agree on that.

As the author of the book does not understand the things he writes about, I think some things need clarification.

Is Linux a Unix clone? No, Linux is one of the systems implementing a part of the specifications: basicly the system interfaces. Even the utilities are not part of Linux.

Did Linus write Linux? No, Linus started to write Linux and produced a basic system. From that point the team grew around Linus.

Is Linus the father of Linux? Yes, he had a strong hand in all major design descisions, contributed a lot of code, made the team work together. In the team there are and were many brilliant designers, keeping a team with many brilliant people together in itself is a major achievement. Linus was able to do so with his thorough knowledge and understanding of the subject and his humor (just remember the "brown paper bag releases")

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 20, 2004 18:32 UTC (Thu) by piman (subscriber, #8957) [Link]

I really don't think that's "enough said". Lots of 'evil' organizations receive no funding from MS, and lots of good organizations do receive funding from them. So I don't see your point.

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 20, 2004 20:30 UTC (Thu) by dano (guest, #21719) [Link]

One word: Sock-puppet. This Institution is the same one that has put out lots of FUD about open source in the past (like about how Windows is more secure than Linux, except that they conveniently excuded malware like viruses and worms). They are funded primarily by Microsoft, much like SCO was (via Baystar), and they seem to exist solely to spread misinformation.

Read Tannenbaum's article about his interview with Ken Brown and you'll see just how clueless Brown is. He supposedly was writing a book about the history of Unix and hadn't even heard of Salus' book. He also stated that no one in 30 years had been able to produce a Unix-like operating system single-handedly, even though Tannenbaum gave him the names of 6 people who had.

dano

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 21, 2004 6:49 UTC (Fri) by jtc (subscriber, #6246) [Link]

It's obvious from the available facts that Brown is incompetent with respect to his ability to write the report he published. He doesn't know enough about technology or legal issues, and apparently didn't even listen properly to what Tanenbaum had to say.

This is so obvious that it's likely that even many non-geek business people will realize he doesn't know what he is talking about.

It could be that this report was bought and paid for by MS, but if that's the case, they certainly didn't get their money's worth.

If ADTI keeps publishing articles like this one, it seems likely that soon no one with any sense of respectability will want to have anything to do with them. (Wasn't Alexis de Tocqueville a respected philosopher? I wonder what his descendants will think if this organization ends up damaging his reputation.)

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 21, 2004 9:01 UTC (Fri) by petegn (guest, #847) [Link]

Like the man said ...
>> Ken Brown and his De Tocqueville Institute are funded by Microsoft. 'Nuff said.

There is not really any more to be said that line says it all Nuff Said .
pete

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 20, 2004 16:33 UTC (Thu) by mmarq (guest, #2332) [Link]

This "guys" are positioned to state that or "Linus Trovalds" was born with the linux sketch graved on his mind,... or else...

... Its the replay gonna be "smoking crack" or what ??...

A sign that the Ma$ter dont sleep... and that Michael's Moore "Incredible Stupid White (black, yellow, pink or blue?) Man" its a title that can prove itself at handy.

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 20, 2004 16:54 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link]

I find it ironic that Ken Brown thinks he is within his rights to publish this book, which is based on Andy Tanenbaum's ideas about the subject, but is something he thinks is wrong, but thinks that Linus was not within his rights to publish Linux, which is based on Andy Tanenbaum's ideas about the subject, but is something he thinks is wrong.

Of course, none of us think Ken Brown is plagerizing his book from Tanenbaum, but Ken Brown, whose ignorance of intellectual property law is so bad that he shouldn't feel safe publishing anything, let alone a book about ownership of intellectual property, must be vulnerable to the suggestion.

Isn't it about time for 60 minutes do do an expose on this whole sad mess?

Posted May 20, 2004 18:09 UTC (Thu) by tjc (subscriber, #137) [Link]

Microsoft has been funding various bits of FUD against Linux for years now. Why the heck hasn't somebody like 60 minutes taken them to task for this?

One possible explanation is that taking MSFT to task doesn't fit with CBS' political/social agenda.

Isn't it about time for 60 minutes do do an expose on this whole sad mess?

Posted May 21, 2004 20:14 UTC (Fri) by emkey (guest, #144) [Link]

Well, MSFT and NBC work together via MSNBC, right? You would think that would actually motivate CBS to take an honest look at MSFT.

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 20, 2004 17:30 UTC (Thu) by fjf33 (subscriber, #5768) [Link]

Isn't, posibly, WinNT also a rip of of Minix. It uses a microkernel correct? I am sure that some of the people working on it took OS Theory in school. If they applied some of what they learned then it would be hard to prove they didn't steal some code. Plus one of the main architects came from VMS, so it is possible he stole code from there too. Anyone that thinks or expect people to work on a vacuum is 'nuts'.

Thankfully we are not asked to prove a negative, but it is easy to write an article using that argument and have the masses say "That's true, it makes sense" and then get FUD going.

Does Windows implement a microkernel design?

Posted May 20, 2004 20:30 UTC (Thu) by nicku (subscriber, #777) [Link]

The Windows kernel is very large; it does not meet the description of being a "tiny microkernel like MINIX". Here Andrew says:

With all the security problems Windows has now, it is increasingly obvious to everyone that tiny microkernels, like that of MINIX, are a better base for operating systems than huge monolithic systems.

Notice that he is contrasting Windows with a microkernel design. The successful (but specialised) example that Andy points to is QNX, which is truly small. Although Microsoft describe their operating system as a microkernel design, a huge amount of code runs at high privelege level, which really negates the aim of simplicity that a microkernel design aspires to.

VMS is definitely a greater influence on Windows NT and it successors than MINIX.

Does Windows implement a microkernel design?

Posted May 20, 2004 21:01 UTC (Thu) by fjf33 (subscriber, #5768) [Link]

That will teach me not to believe MS FUD. :)

Does Windows implement a microkernel design?

Posted May 20, 2004 21:07 UTC (Thu) by alonzo (guest, #2770) [Link]

Yup. WinNT takes many of it's ideas from VMS. See:
http://www.winntmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?IssueID=97&ArticleID=4494

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 20, 2004 22:49 UTC (Thu) by kunitz (subscriber, #3965) [Link]

Probably Microsoft used ideas from the Mach kernel.

See http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs/project/mach/public/www/mach.html.

The project manager Rick Rashid has been hired by Microsoft in the
nineties.

However the big name in Windows NT development has been Dave
Cutler, who of course came from DEC and was responsible there for
VMS. (There are some anecdotes about him in Salus' book about the history
of UNIX.)

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 21, 2004 7:23 UTC (Fri) by janpla (guest, #11093) [Link]

Yes, this really is the a question of fundamental importance to all of us - as we all know, Linux WILL NOT BE ABLE TO RUN if Linus in some remote sense was inspired by the ideas of others!

So now we have reached the state of 'He's, he's, he's .... he's a BASTARD, that's what he is!!!' But what does it matter? Not a thing - Linux is a reality, Tanenbaum got left behind by the development and Microsoft are a bunch of sad wankers. And Linux is still what it is: an excellent platform for serious work.

Tanenbaum seems to take this gracefully - he has his misgivings about the fundamental architecture of Linux, and I am sure he has a good point, but that's it; no attempt to steal Linus' glory, and that shows that he is an honest and worthy man.

Of course Linux is 'a derived work' just like anything else. We all learn from those who came before, and the cleverest of us take the good bits and build something new, in this case Linux. End of story.

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 21, 2004 17:23 UTC (Fri) by Baylink (subscriber, #755) [Link]

This is true....

anyone who hasn't read Spider Robinson's "Melancholy Elephants", which is precisely on point for this topic (and, ISTR won a Hugo), ought to go here -- through the Kind Courtesy of Spider and Jim Baen (*ghod* it's nice to be able to link to this) and read it, promptly.

Is Torvalds really the father of Linux? (News.com)

Posted May 27, 2004 8:46 UTC (Thu) by mbp (subscriber, #2737) [Link]

I don't think it's fair to say Tanenbaum was left behind. It's pretty clear in his response that he was not trying to write a massively popular operating system, in fact he was trying *not* to do that. He was trying to teach how operating systems work by constructing a simple one. On that measure, both Linus and Tanenbaum succeeded.