Top 148 Linux Quotes & Sayings - Page 2
Explore popular Linux quotes.
Last updated on April 20, 2025.
I like to think that I've been a good manager. That fact has been very instrumental in making Linux a successful product.
We're not talking about insignificant amounts of code. It's substantial System V code showing up in Linux.
What commercialism has brought to Linux has been the incentive to make a good distribution that is easy to use and that has all the packaging issues worked out.
I personally think of Linux development as being pretty non-localized, and I work with all the people entirely over e-mail - even if they happen to be working in the Portland area.
I view Linux as something that's not Microsoft - a backlash against Microsoft, no more and no less.
Well, lets just say, if your VCR is still blinking 12:00, you dont want Linux.
I've never regretted not making Linux shareware: I really don't like the "pay for use" binary shareware programs.
What I find most interesting is how people really have taken Linux and used it in ways and attributes and motivations that I never felt.
Open source production has shown us that world-class software, like Linux and Mozilla, can be created with neither the bureaucratic structure of the firm nor the incentives of the marketplace as we've known them.
A couple of years ago this guy called Ken Brown wrote a book saying that Linus stole Linux from me It later came out that Microsoft had paid him to do this
The cyberspace 'earnings' I get from Linux come in the format of having a Network of people that know me and trust me, and that I can depend on in return.
Big Linux deployments have reached the point where it's become a real problem for administrators that they don't have nice tools to manage their servers and desktops.
What we're really after is simply that people acquire a legal license for Windows for each computer they own before they move on to Linux or Sun Solaris or BSD or OS/2 or whatever.
Users and entrepreneurs building new business models off the blockchain means that there are competing interests on how best to scale the network. Linux, also an open source software project, had similar growing pains.
In essence, Chrome OS is the GNU/Linux operating system. However, it is delivered without the usual applications, and rigged up to impede and discourage installing applications.
Linux has definitely made a lot of sense even in a purely materialistic sense.
I can find lots of examples where a game won't make you rich, but I can't find a reasonable case where a Linux port doesn't have at least a small, positive return on investment.
I do believe that in a race, it is naive to think Linux has a hope of making a dent against Microsoft starting from way behind with a fraction of the resources and amateur labor. (I feel the same about Unix.
In essence, Chrome OS is the GNU/Linux operating system. However, it is delivered without the usual applications, and rigged up to impede and discourage installing applications. I'd say the problem is in the nature of the job ChromeOS is designed to do.
We have a lot of existing customers which are also considering Linux desktop migrations and rolling out some of these programs, so we're learning from them.
Most hackers graduate from Unix and Linux platforms. They know them intimately. They don't try to exploit them
While I may not get any money from Linux, I get a huge personal satisfaction from having written something that people really enjoy using, and that people find to be the best alternative for their needs.
Linux has never been about quality. There are so many parts of the system that are just these cheap little hacks, and it happens to run.
I don't expect to go hungry if I decide to leave the University. Resume: Linux looks pretty good in many places.
What commercialism has brought into Linux has been the incentive to make a good distribution that is easy to use and that has all the packaging issues worked out.
Part of doing Linux was that I had to communicate a lot more instead of just being a geek in front of a computer.
I've never regretted not making Linux shareware: I really don't like the pay for use binary shareware programs.
Don't forget that Linux became only possible because 20 years of OS research was carefully studied, analyzed, discussed and thrown away.
We've been using C and C++ way too much - they're nice, but they're very close to the machine and what we wanted was to empower regular users to build applications for Linux.
I think that Microsoft will increasingly feel margin pressure from Linux as well as people saying: well actually the applications that really matter to me are not on my PC. And so they're going to be able to extract less of a monopoly rent, so to speak.
Unix has retarded OS research by 10 years and linux has retarded it by 20.
Think of the Nets infrastructure as a source of natural building resources. Linux is not growing on the trees - it is the trees.
![David "Doc" Searls](/assets/images/photos/avatars/david-"doc"-searls.webp)
One of the reasons that I really don't mind that people are selling Linux commercially is exactly because it does make me feel good that people use the product.
Linux evolved in a completely different way. From nearly the beginning, it was rather casually hacked on by huge numbers of volunteers coordinating only through the Internet.
All operating systems sucks, but Linux just sucks less
I never felt that the naming issue was all that important, but I was obviously wrong, judging by how many people felt. I tell people to call it just plain Linux and nothing more.
I think Linux is a great thing, in the big picture. It's a great hacker's tool, and it has a lot of potential to become something more.
The cyberspace earnings I get from Linux come in the format of having a Network of people that know me and trust me, and that I can depend on in return.
Of course, all of the software I write runs on Linux; that's the beauty of standards, and of cross-platform code. I don't have to run your OS, and you don't have to run mine, and we can use the same applications anyway!
I don't try to be a threat to MicroSoft, mainly because I don't really see MS as competition. Especially not Windows-the goals of Linux and Windows are simply so different.
I changed the Linux copyright license to be the GPL some time in the first half of 1992. Mostly because I had hated the lack of a cheaply and easily available UNIX when I had looked for one a year before.
So I decided that if the architecture is fundamentally sane enough, say it follows some basic rules like it supported paging , then I would be able to say, yes, Linux fundamentally supports that model.
I have a G4 at home. Theyre great machines for individual users, and I even know a few core Linux hackers who are having a lot of fun with them. But if you want to move the needle on the non-Microsoft desktop, youve got to look elsewhere.
Today I am one of the senior technical cadre that makes the Internet work, and a core Linux and open-source developer.
I very seldom worry about other systems. I concentrate pretty fully on just making Linux the best I can.
I get the biggest enjoyment from the random and unexpected places. Linux on cellphones or refrigerators, just because it's so not what I envisioned it. Or on supercomputers.
Before the commercial ventures, Linux tended to be rather hard to set up, because most of the developers were motivated mainly by their own interests.
On a purely technical side, I'm really very happy with how Linux gets used in a very wide set of different areas. It's important for development.
We've announced an Oracle Virtual Compute Appliance, a bunch of low-cost commodity servers running Linux, integrated in our case, with InfiniBand - connected with InfiniBand vs. the traditional Ethernet.
I don't actually follow other operating systems much. I don't compete - I just worry about making Linux better than itself, not others.
Bill Gates really seems to be much more of a business man than a technologist, while I prefer to think of Linux in technical terms rather than as a means to money.
It feels a little bit funny coming here and telling you guys that Linux and open source are the future of gaming. It's sort of like going to Rome and teaching Catholicism to the pope.
I'd rather use Windows and Internet Explorer in Hell than I'd use Linux and Mozilla Firefox in Heaven!
I made very sure that I did not get involved with any of the commercial Linux companies, exactly so that I would be neutral and not ever seen as "working for the competition".
The situation is so much better for programmers today - a cheap used PC, a linux CD, and an internet account, and you have all the tools necessary to work your way to any level of programming skill you want to shoot for.
Linux is its own worst enemy: it's splintered, it has different distributions, it's too complex to run for most people.
Releasing Linux versions has always been a matter of higher code quality, good software architecture, and technical interest for the platform.
I've been employed by the University of Helsinki, and they've been perfectly happy to keep me employed and doing Linux.
The real threat to Linux adoption is Apple, not Microsoft. If you didn't know, now you know.
The interesting thing is when we design and architect a server, we don't design it for Windows or Linux, we design it for both. We don't really care, as long as we're selling the one the customer wants.
