Haiku is a potential alternative to Linux. Linux is good for now, but being hijacked by big corporations.
It’s not being hijacked, can we just stop pretending that? Linux is an open source and community driven project. Anyone can contribute. Including big corporations if they wish so.
They will send a lot of developers and gain some influence in the project accordingly, if their contributions are not too stupid and if they follow the rules of the project. It is all working exactly as intended. If you don’t like that, you should reconsider if you want to be near any open source project at all, because that’s how they all work. You should try something with a non-commercial license instead.
8 Likes
If you don’t like that, you should reconsider if you want to be near any open source project at all, because that’s how they all work.
I’m pretty sure cathedral-style projects work differently.
Let me be more concrete. I don’t like recent Linus Torvalds’s decision, making an impression it was in the best project/community interest. Even if I’m completely wrong, it’s worth to look at alternatives to use in the worst case scenario.
Here is the board of the Linux Foundation
21 people. And 15 of them are quite openly there to represent corporations. No need to dig for it, it is right there on the page.Sony Intel, Huawei … Microsoft? 15 out of 21 is not “some influence”. It is an easy majority to steamroller through whatever they want.
And of course those people only have the best interests of the open-source community in mind. They wouldn’t ever put the interests of their corporate masters first. Perish the thought.
Hmm, but the Linux Foundation exists to support Linux, right? and “linux” means the kernel.
Actually only about 3% of their expenses go towards the kernel, according to their own 2024 report.
As far back as 2010 80 percent of patches to the Linux kernel came from corporate programmers. The era of people programming for Linux in their spare time is far behind us. I’m sure they still exist, here and there, but that is no longer where the action is.
Sorry, Pulkomandy, the Linux you idealize died twenty years ago. All we can do is hope that Haiku doesn’t go down the same path. Haiku is still real open-source. Long may it stay that way!
6 Likes
Read again what I said. This is no hijacking. The Linux project is working as designed. Yes, it is run by corporations, and no, I don’t idealize it (otherwise I wouldn’t be working on Haiku, right?). It is what it is. I was just complaining about the word “hijacking”, which is not what happened here. This is a project growing beyond the scale that hobby-driven development can handle. Congratulations to Linux for being so succesful!
It is also thanks to this that I have a paid job, working with Linux and the other software that goes around it, and occasionally trying to contribute a few things there. I am happy with my current paid job.
As I said, if you don’t like it, consider projects with a non-commercial license, because this will likely happen sooner or later to any open source project. Either it gets abandoned, or it gets some commercial traction. That is exactly what the open source licenses are for, allow everyone, including big corporations, to contribute. For some projects it may take longer than others, that’s all…
You are wrong about what open source is.
What you want is community driven development with no companies involved. That is possible in open source projects, but completely independant of it. You can do it with non-commercial but non open source licenses. And you can do open source without any community involvement.
You should rather be aware of that if it matters to you, otherwise, you will inevitably be disappointed at some point.
7 Likes
It can be played in many ways. You can give essentially full control to corporations (like linux), you can limit it (sqlite, zig) or you can avoid corporations entirely. It’s not black and white.
I agree that community driven and opensource are different (but overlapping) things.
Indeed, it is no hijacking. And yes, for large projects like this, corporations involvement is inevitable, we like it or not. It doesn’t just happen in operating systems, even programming languages development is like that. And I am not talking about programming languages introduced by such corporations.
The problem with Linux (which is just the kernel) is what corporations are involved - and I think that’s what other people in this thread find unacceptable. I don’t think I have to name those corporations. You will find the devil itself in at least 3 platinum members and one golden member. Is there anyone who thinks at least one of them pays money because… they care about open source? They would be very very happy if anything even remotely close to open source didn’t exist at all. They just couldn’t kill it, so they embraced it to control it as much they can. It’s ancient common tactics.
And of course not a single word about Free Software - that’s something none in Linux Foundation wants to hear about, FSF is constantly attacked by them. That includes Torvalds (who, by the way, seems to don’t care or even be happy with M$ being in the top tier of Linux Foundation; nor he cares RedHat, a big friend of M$ for many years already, is in the list and pushed crap like systemd so that most GNU/Linux distros adopted it.
There is also the direction Linux takes for years now. I do not have proof it is what it is because of the corporations involved, and I am not going to speculate. What I do know is it’s not the right direction.
2 Likes
Linux is pushed by many corporations towards a goal they deem good. Linux allows this when it aligns with the kernel development. Systemd is a completely unrelates topic, you can use it. You don’t have to.
For my part I am quite happy to be able to play video games on my steam deck or on my “gaming” computer with linux. I don’t care what other corporations do with linux. Linux is so big it’s like a common good. It’s a bit like vilifying water because coca cola uses it.
1 Like
and pushed crap like systemd so that most GNU/Linux distros adopted it
Most distros did not figure out an init system that is not a pile of bash scripts. In fact, before systemd they actively ignored any alternative inits (remember initng?).
Guix is a pleasant exception, it uses GNU Shepherd. Kudos to GNU, I suppose.
1 Like
In my paid work doing Linux stuff I am extremely happy to have systemd instead of the pile of bash scripts. It saved me countless hours of work and alows me to focus on my own code, and not on basic tasks that the operating system should take care of, such as restarting a service when it crashes.
I think Haiku’s launch daemon is not very different from systemd, even if it is less feature complete.
Seriously…
They are all very happy to get all this work done by someone else, instead of doing it themselves. Why would they want that to not exist? They would just waste more money reproducing it.
This is not Steve Ballmer’s Microsoft from the 1990s. No one makes money from selling operating systems, or even software in general, anymore. It’s all about collecting user data and showing targetted ads now. And you can do that with free and open source software (they’re exactly the same thing, btw. Your worries about privacy and community driven software are justified, but largely unrelated to the fact that the software is free software or not).
1 Like
Yes, but Shepard is not the only option.
I mentioned systemd only as an example of what exactly RedHat is. Whether this (or the undeniable fact they are big friends with M$) is a good thing or not is up to the reader.
Unfortunately the mentality of “I don’t care as long I get facilitation” is what made M$, most modern GNU/Linux distributions, Android and G00gle in general (plus others) so popular. Who cares if Steam itself is a giant DRM that in a just world should be illegal; they can play games, even those not designed for GNU/Linux, and that’s all it matters. Who cares if Window$, Android, and others are just giant spyware pretending to be operating systems. I can go with examples of “who cares about this and that” for days…
Anyway, my two bits concerning why Haiku:
- It is not supported by something like Linux Foundation, with the devil itself in it.
- The system is surprisingly snappy, even on really old hardware.
- Easy on resources, unlike pretty much everything else out there nowadays - except most BSDs, and small niche operating systems (which can’t replace your current desktop OS anyway).
- It is independent but does not try to re-invent the wheel (e.g. POSIX compatibility is there).
- Packaging system is great.
- Very well-built API (still big and won’t learn it in one day, but the documentation is there).
- Helpful and friendly community (even though they argue sometimes they are still friendly).
- A user-friendly operating system, without devouring resources at the same time. My wife (who doesn’t care about operating systems) uses it without issues in everything, including her profession and daily information.
Of course, it’s not all sunshine and roses. There are still things to be done/improved, but even if you are not particularly interested, you will find a very nice operating system to use.
2 Likes
That’s only partially correct. They also make money by renting you crappy software (like Office 365). Or selling you support. Big organizations rely on them to fix the crap the operating system (or applications for it) is full of. If it wasn’t proprietary closed-source software, they couldn’t do that. Certainly not that easily.
Free Software and Open Source may look like “exactly the same thing”, but the big difference is the agenda. You will never ever find anyone related to Linux Foundation even mentioning the term Free Software, unless it is for attacking it. They don’t want to even hear the word “freedom”.
Also, of course you can take free and open source software and make it evil. Android did that, introducing every dictator’s wet dream of spyware. North Korea’s Red Star is another pronounced example. The difference is, if it is still free software, the crap they added can and will be revealed by someone. Admittedly, that matters less nowadays, because people just don’t care, so they are not afraid to openly introduce blatant spyware (like “Recall”).
1 Like
You misread that. I don’t care what other systems do. Android doesn’t affect me, and I don’t care, neither does WSL etc. I can use the free linux I want. And yes, I can play games. Freedom to use my computer includes the freedom to use proprietary software I choose to use.
Steam can play windows games, sure. They use wine for that. But you can just use wine yourself. Steam using this open source software for their purposes does not affect you in the slightest if you want to use wine itself.
There is no agenda, or at least not where you think there is.
Both “free software” and “open source” refer to very specific definitions. For “free software” it is the 4 freedoms defined by the FSF. For “open source” it is the opensource definition set by the OSI, largely based on Debian’s checklist for what they can or cannot include in Debian.
These definitions apply to the software itself, and do not care about who produced it and how. There is nothing to attack here. It’s a definition, and your software (or rather, your license) matches it, or it doesn’t.
What you say is still true, people publish their software under free software/open source licenses for a variety of reasons. But I don’t think there is even a centralized agenda. In the case of these corporations involvement in Linux, they simply want to make it better for their own needs. Al lthe things RedHat have developped, you make sound like an intentional attack on Linux. I don’t think that’s the case. Rather, it’s bringing Linux in the direction they need, that is, the one that will bring them money. And, as I said before, no one sells operating systems anymore. The money is elsewhere. That’s why we see Linux get equipped with server and ebedded-software oriented things, that do not always fall right into place on the Desktop, and especially not on the personal computer Desktop (when was the last time you saw someone buy a version of Linux to install on their home computer? On companies computer it is already very rare, but at home?).
So, for me, it’s a story of negligence rather than agenda. Not enough people care about parsonal computers in the Linux world. A lot of people with a lot of money care about other things, and will use their resources to get Linux working where they need it: on servers, on embedded devices, on phones and tablets. The last attempt at getting it on the desktop with some serious backing was Canonical, and maybe System76 today at a smaller scale.
Collabora is renting LibrOffice online systems in just the same way. Seems to be going well for them. Really, nothing to do with free and open source software. On the contrary.
When you do free/open source software, you will have a hard time selling the software itself, as people would then be free to re-sell your software (with or without changes) or even give it away for free. So, naturally, if you are a company, you need other ways to make moneys. The obvious ways are:
- Selling support
- Keeping the software running on your own servers, and renting access to it
- Extracting value from your users in some other way without them having to pay (so, personal data and targeted ads).
If you try to do free software in the current capitalist world, this is what happens. Dreams of community driven development don’t matter at all.
If you don’t want this to happen, a free software license doesn’t protect you from it in any way. So, as I said earlier, if this matters to you, you should consider some other way to keep the software available. The most effective way seems to be distributing it under a non-commercial license, to be sure no one can make money out of it in any way. Or you can just bet on your luck and hope no big corporation ever take any interest on what you do.
As a final note, when the Haiku project was started, there was some discussion about this. The decision to use an open source license was made very intentionally in that context: to be sure that, should some company buy BeOS from Be and decide to do something with it, they could benefit from the work done by Haiku (then OpenBeOS) and include it in their work. So, not exactly the anti-companies mindset you could find elsewhere. Sure, it didn’t happen, and for now, Haiku gets only 20% of its money from Google, without Google taking much control over things.
4 Likes
Many years ago, when downloading 5 CDs was out of question. 
Not to mention you would get a thick printed manual as well.
On paper, that’s correct. In practice, FSF (as a whole, or more typically specific members) are constantly attacked. And we are not talking about knightly attacks here. We are talking about below-the-belt attacks with ridiculously false “arguments” to justify them, texts that pretend to be pro-free software while they are exactly the opposite, and shiploads of hypocrisy by the same ballerinas over and over again for decades. You name it, they did it, and the target is always the same. This is the case from the time the term “Open Source” was invented. They don’t give a dime about freedom, only convenience. In fact, they despise anything related to “freedom” as FSF defines it, and they won’t lose a single opportunity to asseverate that. So there must be an agenda here. An agenda prominent members of the Linux Foundation are very happy with, and this is why they are involved.
Two decades ago M$ was attacking Linux, as they would attack anything threatening their monopoly (anybody remembers “Get the Facts”?). It didn’t work, Linux dominated servers. So they adopted a more clever tactics: We can’t kill it, so let’s embrace it and bring it where we want it. Now stay there, and - God forbid - don’t you ever mention “freedom”.
The direction they need (and succeeded for the the most part) is what some people don’t like. And nobody should like it. Not because they want money (of course they do), but because there is zero ethics involved. This is why M$ and RedHat fell in love so badly.
Initially, the way to face this reality was to sell support to companies using their software. But of course money is never enough, if you can get more by just throwing any kind of ethics out of the window.
I don’t think there is anyone living in a dreamland Utopia, and thinking you can have big software projects without corporations involved. Or there are dreamers thinking corporations will invest money just because they are the good guys. The problem is where you draw the red line.
LF seems not to have any red line. They try to pretend there is one, but there is nowhere to be seen. Only pseudo-red lines for secondary topics exist in kernel development. If you have the slightest objection on more serious matters, including which corporations are involved and what they want, you are out, in the most rude way.
No anti-company mindset here. Not per se, at least. As long Haiku remains what it is now, I don’t mind the mindset behind it. Just don’t sell your soul to the Devil. It always shows in the final product.
Ok, that was too long. I promise I won’t add another one in this thread. Now back to figure out how to make a hpkg for that library of mine…
1 Like
I think the FSF should replace its governance, indeed. I signed some of these open letters.
Their approach is out of touch with the modern software world and just doesn’t work anymore. Fortunately, other organizations such as the FSFE and the Software Freedom Conservancy are doing the work. The FSF is dead, and it’s not because of outsider attack, but because of failure to get new people involved in the positions of power. What has the FSF done lately that helps fighting for user’s privacy? The “respect your freedom” project that encourages hardware to have non-updatable firmware instead of updatable one? The Hurd kernel? The list of free operating system where things like Haiku or Debian are not welcome? The add-on for browsers that blocks javascript if it doesn’t have an open source license? A guide to encrypting mails with PGP? These are the thing they list on their homepage, some of them launched 10+ years ago with no updates since.
So, the FSF is not doing a good job in my opinion, and the “attacks” are justified.
3 Likes
I’m not quite sure why Haiku is not welcomed, but I certainly see why Debian isn’t (ancient Debian user here - in fact I was involved as a packager as well, and I left for a reason).
As for what FSF has done lately, I would say… all the reasons you mentioned plus a lot more, including promoting free software, such as Emacs (which is a constantly improved brilliant piece of software), GNU Screen, GNU itself, and … oh wait the list is really long. I’ll stop here. But it’s not about FSF itself (which is not perfect, that’s for sure). It’s all about LF just hates freedom, and for a reason.
Anyway, agree to disagree. Peace. 
We pacakge wifi firmwares so that people can, you know, access the internet. That gets you off the list. As a result of this or similar very strict rules, none of the popular Linux distributions are in there.
In the case of Haiku, they also mention non free software, that is because we package Wonderbrush. They have not updated the page listing all the things they have refused to list since Wonderbrush became free software.
2 Likes
I see. And I do agree they overdo it sometimes. Distributions are out of the list even if they optionally provide non-free software at a separate repository. On the other hand, someone has to be very strict. If you start watering your rules, you may end up endorsing… Crapbuntu or Arch.