User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

LWN's coverage

LWN's coverage

Posted Dec 16, 2002 12:04 UTC (Mon) by james (subscriber, #1325)
In reply to: Better name? by Peter
Parent article: The LWN.net 2002 Linux Timeline

Maybe LWN's coverage is a little too broad, but not by much.

One assumption, and I think it is a good one, is that many Linux users and administrators are using it in a mixed environment. This means, for example, that Windows problems can be our problems: certainly if they start adversely affecting our systems or our bandwidth.

Suppose that there was a new Code Red style Windows worm. It was spreading widely, causing Windows users problems, and showing up, in bulk, in the log files of Linux applications. Under the current approach, the LWN editors would write a short article explaining what all those lines were, and saying that, as far as they knew, Free Software was not vulnerable.

I personally find that helpful, and relevant to the Linux experience of a fair proportion of the readership. I'd say that had a place here.

(Now if the Windows worm showed up problems with Free Software, or squid or iptables or sendmail/postfix could be configured to block it, knowing that would be Really Useful).

There's also an assumption that our computing interests are broad enough that some "general computing" pieces are relevant, especially in the growing number of areas where most of the "general computing" is done with Free Software.

For example, this month's Crypto-gram newsletter mentions Linux once. Yet much of it is highly relevant to Linux security administrators. Similarly, (pointers to) articles on accessibility, clustering, standardisation or internationalisation are relevant, useful and interesting.

And Linux isn't just about Free Software these days. The vocal supporters are those who come from the Free Software / Open Source communities, but there is a reason why commercial Unix on x86 is visibly on its way out.

Many commercial Unix applications are deploying on Linux because it's just plain better than commercial Unix on x86. LWN can't cover the lot of them, but major new developments or security bugs on the most important ones probably would be useful or interesting enough to enough readers.

Besides, people who are used to paying thousands or millions for commercial software on Linux are more likely to pay for a subscription to LWN to help keep their software running...

James.


(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds