I also offer an article, which is an unfinished article that needs to be improved. I will gradually improve it, and I also welcome interested friends to jointly write it and are welcome to put forward opinions and suggestions. This article was originally posted on the Sysoft Time and Space Forum, but this website is often inaccessible, so I also post a copy here (because I still need to keep modifying this article).
What is Linux?
Linux has been introduced to China for ten years, and I have been in contact with Linux for nearly ten years. In these ten years, people's discussions about Linux are all aspects, and their insights into Linux are diverse. The quarrels about Linux are no longer something new, but seem to have become an indispensable part of Linux. From these quarrels, I have learned a lot of knowledge and benefited a lot, including technical aspects and non-technical aspects. I am just an ordinary user, I can't go into the technology of Linux in depth, my discussion is only limited to non-technical aspects. I have learned that Microsoft is an obstacle to Linux, and there are countless Linux armies outside Microsoft. Some companies initially had no great enthusiasm for Linux, and even had some hostility, but later, the hostility diminished and they gradually recognized Linux. For example, Sun is such a company. Around 2000, I once thought that Sun and Microsoft were in the same boat. In fact, these companies have hostility towards Linux for their own interests, which is normal and understandable. There are all kinds of things in the vast world, and SCO has a different model for Linux. It first supported Linux and became a distributor of Linux, and then accused Linux of plagiarizing its source code, thus standing on the opposite side of Linux. Of course, there are also people who hold a wait-and-see attitude towards Linux, which is very natural. In recent years, the quarrels about Linux have not decreased, but have intensified and become more intense. The continuous escalation of these quarrels has prompted me to think more deeply about a series of issues such as the phenomenon and essence of Linux.
What is Linux? This cannot be covered by a simple "Unix-like operating system". Such an answer only reveals the technical composition of Linux, but does not highlight the most important aspect of Linux.
So what is the most important aspect of Linux? Or more directly, what is the essence of Linux? I want to use such a perspective, that is, Linux is not just a representative of an operating system. Many people have used Linux as a synonym for "free software", and Linux is even used in some occasions to generally refer to "open source software", although there are quite large differences between these different concepts. Now I can state my main view: Essentially, Linux is a software system developed by users as the main body, including system software and application software. The word Linux here is just a substitute name, because the focus here is on "free development", and the developed software can even run only on Windows or cross-platform on multiple operating systems, not just on Linux.
In the 1980s and 1990s, shareware was popular, and many shareware ran under DOS and Windows. Although shareware does not open source, compared with non-shareware, it is already quite progressive. However, shareware can only be modified by the program author, and others cannot participate in development, which greatly restricts the development of shareware. When the later "free software" emerged, shareware completed its mission and gradually withdrew from the historical stage.
The author of shareware may also be an ordinary user or a former professional programmer, but people who do not expect to get great economic benefits from shareware. They may value the social value of their own labor results more than personal value, and their subjective intention of "doing good deeds" may be more obvious. The software they make is for themselves and for others, and they are likely to use others' shareware at the same time. Therefore, I tend to regard such software authors as "programming users". At first, when there were few shareware, the authors of shareware could not be regarded as "programming users" because they were mainly contributors. Things are rare and precious, and in the eyes of the public, these contributors are very rare. However, when there are more and more contributors, a mutually beneficial relationship is naturally formed among the contributors, and this network of relationships is getting denser and denser. When it reaches a certain degree, these program authors can be regarded as "programming users". In the era of closed source code, the development of this situation has a certain limit. First, users themselves are very difficult to access the core of the operating system, which makes the development of shareware only tilt towards application programs and tool software. Second, commercial operating system manufacturers, such as Microsoft, can use the continuous transfer of the operating system to fight against shareware, making shareware unable to become popular, so as not to threaten the interests of the monopolist. Under such a background, shareware is struggling. This has laid the groundwork for the birth of free software.
In the era of free software, due to the openness of the source code, the number of users participating in development has increased sharply, and the gap between programmers and users has been effectively shortened, and programming is no longer so mysterious. There are a large number of advanced Windows users around us. They often help others solve Windows problems and become "volunteer service personnel" of Microsoft. Such people are often called "experts". These "experts" are different from ordinary users. They have a pursuit of technology and are good at researching. The arrival of the era of free software has basically no appeal to those pure fool users. Those users just want to be users. They just want to use the computer to work or entertain. They don't want to solve computer problems by themselves at all. They regard the computer as an electrical appliance. When it is broken, they find someone to repair it. They don't even know what hardware and software are. However, for those "experts", the arrival of the era of free software is simply a pie in the sky. They can't wait to spend 24 hours a day on the Internet learning various knowledge. If they don't surf the Internet for one day, they are afraid of falling behind. Microsoft tries every means to hide its technical secrets, which are completely beyond the reach of ordinary people and impossible to understand. However, the program of free software tells you all the details. As long as you are willing, you can get everything you want, from the system bottom layer to application software, all available. For "experts", the more source codes of programs, the better, they accept them all, good. It is such people who have become the vanguard of free software. Or rather, free software has really liberated such a group of people. This is not a small group, but a huge army, mighty. It is such an invisible army that is going to bury Microsoft consciously or unconsciously. So far, free software can be said to have liberated productivity to the greatest extent. Those "experts" who were idle in the past are all very busy, and they keep scolding that God has given too little time. They no longer complain about what Microsoft has hidden, because they don't need to know. Linux is expanding at a cosmic big bang speed and scale under such a background, unstoppable. The participation of users is the most prominent feature of this era. In the past, they couldn't participate, but now, the excellent ones among them can participate in development. What a big difference! In the previous era of commercial software and the era of shareware, it was impossible to mobilize such a wide range of forces to join the development camp and finally form a huge army to challenge, subvert, and bury the commercial software ecosystem that is easy to bring about monopoly. Commercial software will inevitably bring about monopoly. The perfect legal system in capitalist countries cannot pose any substantial threat to such a monopolist. This is because the monopoly in the software world is cross-national. It can bring almost infinite benefits to the country where the monopoly company is located. The difference of this benefit is that it can plunder the interests of other countries and expand to all fields such as politics, military, national defense, science and technology, education, etc. far beyond the economic scope. Therefore, the monopoly country cannot impose a real sanction on the monopolist, at most it is just a show. In the era of closed source code, if a software company wants to gain a greater advantage, it must necessarily develop an operating system. Only from this bottom layer can it develop itself safely and also control other potential competitors at will. Over time, this company will become a behemoth like a snowball, and other companies will all become the prey of this beast, thus losing the hope of survival. Operating systems have the characteristic of "exclusivity". After an operating system has an advantage, another one is very easy to suffer a defeat, and once it fails, it is very difficult to make a comeback, unless there is a new force at work, leading to the re-shuffling of the entire ecosystem, just like the extinction of dinosaurs. The development of the software world is the same as the development of other things. There are all local imbalances. The law of the survival of the fittest in nature has promoted the evolution of various organisms, and finally the intelligent human beings have won, while other organisms are on the verge of extinction under the disaster-like development of human beings. The development of the software world is the same. There will always be one to win. No matter whether it is Microsoft or not, it will do what Microsoft does, that is, by any means, whether humane or inhumane, legal or illegal, no matter how low and dirty, as long as it can achieve its purpose, it will dare to adopt it. War never pays attention to humanity. Japan carried out massacres in China, German fascists expanded wildly, and the United States dropped atomic bombs on Japan. All of these did not consider the word "morality". Yeah, what reason is there for war? Laden carried out the 911 incident in the United States, which is called "terrorist attack". Think about it, why did they carry out terrorist attacks in the United States instead of other countries? Isn't this a war? Only when you are an enemy will you launch a war against you. You are not its enemy, and it has no reason to launch a war against you. Under the current situation, the strength of the free software community is still weak, and it cannot pose a real threat to Microsoft, but only shows some conceptual threats, and these threats are more or less illusory. The free community will only be honest when it gives Microsoft a severe blow, and this will be realized after several years. However, Microsoft is currently facing another form of enemy, that is, an enemy like Google. Google does not mainly engage in software development, and Google is not very interested in open source software itself. What it values is the utilization value of free software. It mainly wants to use the power of the free software community to help it get rid of the threat of Microsoft. Microsoft's traditional operating system and application software business model has come to an end. There are two reasons for this. First, the operating system has been popular for many years, and the previous old machines already have operating systems, and they no longer need new operating systems. Microsoft's new operating system generally does not want to support old machines. Therefore, only new machines need operating systems. Compared with the total number of machines, this proportion is not too large. Coupled with the factor of piracy, the market of operating systems and conventional application software has actually become saturated, and the profit is not so great. Now there are many software that are themselves free, and only make money through other ways (such as advertisements). This is to transform software into a service. But what about Microsoft? It has not accepted such an idea at all. It still wants to make money with its software. It didn't expect that its software has depreciated. Things are rare and precious. When there are Linux operating systems and office software everywhere, selling such things is not as prosperous as before. Second, Microsoft's operating system has been developed for many years, and there are really no new tricks. It can only promote by creating incompatibility and implementing strong buying and strong selling. But users are not all real fools. In this way, it is a vicious circle, and people are more and more reluctant to recognize it. People have realized that Microsoft has evolved into a gangster, and its operating system and office software have also begun to have the characteristics of gangster software. That is to say, even if we completely do not consider the existence and potential threat of free software, Microsoft has come to the end of its rope. This old single-machine era and this old software development profit model will become the past. And the new network era and software service profit model are about to begin. Does this new era have to completely destroy the ancient software development model? Of course, we can't be so absolute when looking at the problem. The old software development model has its own foundation, and it will not disappear completely. The new era does not suddenly bury the old era, but has a gradual process. Google is a typical representative of this era. Google also develops software, but its software either runs on the client side and is completely free, or runs on the server side and is completely closed (or may open part of the source code in the future), but its focus is on providing network services. At present, many functions of the conventional software developed by Microsoft have not been realized on the network, or although they have been realized, they are not perfect enough. Therefore, network operating systems and application software can be regarded as an undeveloped field. In an undeveloped field, there must be great potential. The rise of Google and the decline of Microsoft are inevitable. How can Microsoft not want to change? However, the strong inertia of the Microsoft train makes it not easy to make a change. First, the concepts of the existing programmers employed by Microsoft are not easy to change. Second, Microsoft itself is not willing to change. Its vested interests all depend
因为我们亲手创建，这个世界更加美丽。
StickyI
