Linux 版 (精华区)
发信人: netiscpu (还没想好), 信区: Linux
标 题: Java is dead, NT is next, and more...
发信站: 紫 丁 香 (Sat Aug 29 14:03:38 1998), 转信
Linus on Linux
Java is dead, NT is next, and more.
Linus speaks
By Robert McMillan
Abstract
SunWorld Senior Editor Robert McMillan
caught up with Linux creator Linus
Torvalds recently to get his take on Sun,
Linux, NT, and Java. And though we asked
him, no, Linus would not say anything
about his new job at the ultra-secretive
Transmeta. (2,000 words)
SunWorld: What's the relationship between the Linux
community and Microsoft?
Linus Torvalds: I guess it counts as fairly hostile,
mainly because a lot of the Linux users are fairly
fed up with Microsoft. I mean, they wouldn't be
Linux users otherwise.
The users of Solaris tend to be Unix users. Most
Linux users are ex-DOS or Windows users. And there
are a lot of people there who really dislike
Microsoft. But at the same time, most of the
developers are certainly not anti-Microsoft. For
example, me, I don't care. I think it's tasteless
that they have such a strong market, but at the same
time I've actually never been a Microsoft user
myself.
SW: Microsoft has said that they have no plans to
port their applications -- Internet Explorer for
example -- to Linux because there is no customer
demand. Is that true?
LT: That's not the reason, I'm fairly certain.
They're doing HP-Unix versions. I mean, dream on.
It's not because they think that HP-Unix people
would like Internet Explorer. That's not the issue.
The real reason is just that when you do a port to
HP-Unix, you aren't porting to something that is in
any way a rival. HP-Unix has absolutely nothing to
do with Windows NT. It's politically the right thing
to do.
They very much know about Linux; and they very much
don't want to port to it. And the reason they don't
want to port to it is they know that on PCs, NT and
Linux have about the same user base.
SW: How big a threat is Linux to Windows NT?
LT: I honestly don't know. But with NT you are
already seeing signs of bad design -- like, NT 5.0
has been slipping for a while. From all I've heard,
they have this behemoth that is so big, they
couldn't get it to build reliably when people made
changes. They definitely have problems maintaining a
sane source base.
SW: Linux has a large source base, too. How is it
any better off than Windows NT?
LT: A useful Linux distribution could be half the
size of NT, but if you get a CD, it's probably 100
million [lines of code]. But the packages are
independently developed, so they aren't a
maintenance nightmare to each other. I don't care
that GCC [GNU C Compiler] is a few hundred thousand
lines of code, because it doesn't impact me.
Microsoft has this one tree that they have to
maintain. It shouldn't be a problem for them, but it
obviously is.
The kernel
SW: It seems that a great deal of your work is
devoted to keeping the Linux kernel clean.
LT: For very selfish reasons,I don't want to
clutter up the kernel because it makes it so
hard to maintain. And nobody's ever been in that
position, when it comes to NT. So what I think will
happen is that in five years, Microsoft will come
out with the `new-new' technology -- something
completely new, because Windows NT will be where
Windows 95 is right now, which is too complex and
too fragile. Because nobody knows all of it, and
it's really hard to maintain. I don't think NT gives
you many benefits right now. The only benefit you
get is that it runs most Windows programs. And
assuming Wine [a Windows emulation package] starts
working reliably, that benefit is gone.
SW: A few years ago, Sun had visions of taking on
Microsoft on the desktop. Is there anything to be
learned by their failure?
LT: One thing is that if you go after Microsoft, you
don't do that by selling an expensive system. You
need to give an NT person a reason to run your
operating system. And Solaris was never that.
Solaris was never something that a Windows person
ever had any reason to switch to. It was way too
expensive; it didn't give a Windows user much at
all. It was completely unsupported, in reality, on
PC hardware. Solaris x86 was there, but let's face
it, it wasn't Solaris.
Merced
SW: How will Linux get ported to Intel's
next-generation microprocessor architecture, Merced?
LT: There are already people...for example at CERN,
the European high-energy physics laboratory -- they
are already using Linux to a large degree. All the
CERN math libraries have been ported to Linux. And I
know, for example, that they've already been talking
to Intel, saying, "whatever happens, we want to run
Linux on Merced too."
The big thing, actually, is to port the GCC compiler
to Merced. I suspect there probably is already some
project somewhere. They're doing it under a
non-disclosure agreement (NDA) at this point. When
Merced is actually released, I suspect that within
quite a short time frame you will find GCC for
Merced.
Probably what will happen is that, yes, we won't
have Linux for Merced when Merced comes out, but I
bet Linux will be running on Merced faster than most
others [operating systems] within half a year.
SW: Will Merced bring any major changes to Linux?
LT: Linux is already 64-bit. It's actually the
easiest 64-bit type, little endian, which is exactly
what we have for Alpha right now. The EPIC-ness
[Explicitly Parallel Instruction Computing] of
Merced -- VLIW [Very-Long Instruction Word] as
everybody else calls it -- is a problem for the
compiler. It's a problem for the tool chain, but
it's completely irrelevant to the kernel itself. It
doesn't create any problems in that sense.
SW: Tell us about the SMP (symmetric
multiprocessing) work you've been doing on Linux.
LT: That's what I've been working on for the last
year or so. It's in a much nicer state right now. We
still have things we know aren't at all optimal, but
all the infrastructure is there.
The only sane way to go from UP to SMP is to
essentially force the kernel to run on only one CPU
at a time. It can switch between CPUs, but it only
runs on one at one specific time. Which means that
you don't have to rewrite any of the kernel. You
just have to rewrite the low-level entry points to
the kernel and make sure that they lock each other
out. It's really simple.
SW: When will companies like Dell start selling
Linux machines?
LT: The only thing that will make one of the big
companies pre-install [Linux] is just market.
There's also pressure from certain obvious quarters
not to do it. Even though it's probably not on
paper, I suspect it's probably true that Microsoft
doesn't like having other systems pre-installed. You
probably need to have a very noticeable market to
decide this. I think the point of no return is 10 to
15 percent of the market. We aren't there yet. We're
closer to five.
Small vendors already install Linux. At the point
that one of the larger ones notices that it's losing
sales to smaller ones, that's probably when it will
start happening.
Java is dead
SW: What are your thoughts on Java?
LT: I think everybody hates Java as a desktop thing.
I see Java mentioned a lot lately, but all of the
mentions within the last year have been of Java as a
server language, not as a desktop language. If you
go back a year and a half, everybody was talking
about Java on the desktop. They aren't anymore. It's
dead. And once you're dead on the desktop, my
personal opinion is you're dead. If servers are
everything you have, just forget it. Why do you
think Sun, HP -- everybody -- is nervous about
Microsoft? It's not because they make great servers.
It's because they control the desktop. Once you
control the desktop, you control the servers.
It's no longer something that will revolutionize the
industry. It could have revolutionized the industry
if it was on the desktop, but I don't see that
happening anymore. I hope I'm wrong. Really. I just
don't think I am.
SW: How did Sun blow it?
LT: Too much noise, too much talk, too much
discussion, not enough "show me."
SW: So Sun's credibility is shot?
LT: It's the credibility. It's also the fact that
their implementations were bad. So you have people
like HP who just decided that, "Hey, I can do a
better implementation. I don't need Sun anymore." Or
you have people like Microsoft who decide, "Okay,
let's do our own extensions." And because the Sun
implementation isn't good enough to carry Java on
its own, the Microsoft extensions actually make
sense to people. And it's just not compelling enough
for anybody to switch.
Sun has done this right in the past. Sun did it
right with NFS. NFS became the standard because NFS
was the only game in town at the time. It was freely
available; things like that. NFS is a really crappy
standard, but, I mean, it's there. And Java could
have been a standard. But in order to get a standard
that actually stands up to something, you have to
get it onto enough machines that nobody can come in
with a competing standard -- which means that you
really have to execute on it.
I could be wrong. There are people writing Java, but
there are a lot of people who gave up on Java. I
think Corel is the biggest example.
Essentially I see the Java engine just slipping, not
going anywhere. And I really hate that happening
because Java could have been a big boost to Linux.
SW: Didn't the Linux community have a difficult
relationship with JavaSoft?
LT: This is part of why I think Java has died.
Instead of just leveraging off the Linux base that
really wanted to have Java working, they just made
it hard for the Linux base to get Java working.
I know that there were people who had sources
available and were able to do JVM [Java virtual
machine] binaries. They all came out for Linux, but
they came out two months late. And nobody got to
play with the sources. Nobody got to fix the
problems. So right now there are still people
working on Java for Linux, but most of them seem to
have given up on the Sun implementations. They're
using Kaffe and writing their own libraries.
The group in charge of Java at Sun had some
licensing problems for the Linux version [of the
Java Development Kit] and for two or three months it
looked like the JDK from Sun wouldn't even be
available. And that made a lot of Linux people
really unhappy and pissed off at Sun. Those
licensing fee issues were finally clarified, but the
damage had been done.
This answer is not here yet
SW: What are you working on at Transmeta Corp.?
LT: What they're actually doing is a secret. It's a
hardware company, but they do have a software side.
I can't answer any questions about Transmeta.
SW: It's a long way from Finland, though.
LT: I knew that the only way to actually force
myself to actually write the thesis was to have a
pressing reason to do so. I liked being at the
university, but I wanted to do something else. I was
kind of thinking that, `Hey, I want to see the
commercial side, and maybe I'll go back to the
university because I have enjoyed it.' But I at
least want to see the other side of the fence. And
now that I've seen the other side of the fence, I'm
fairly certain I don't want to go back to the
university.
I really like working at a commercial company. You
don't have to write papers. You actually get to
code, which I really enjoy. And you have a very
clear goal. You don't have to make up some goal to
make grants.
Resources
Linus Torvald's personal Web page
http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/~torvalds/
The Linux Journal Linus Torvalds resource page
http://www.ssc.com/linux/linus.html
Transmeta Corp. http://www.transmeta.com
GNU http://www.gnu.org/
Wine FAQ
ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet-by-hierarchy/comp/os/linux/
answers/windows-emulation/wine-faq
--
Enjoy Linux!
-----It's FREE!-----
※ 来源:.紫 丁 香 bbs.hit.edu.cn.[FROM: mtlab.hit.edu.cn]
Powered by KBS BBS 2.0 (http://dev.kcn.cn)
页面执行时间:204.609毫秒