Life After Linux Holds New Set of Challenges For Its Proud Creator
Linus Torvalds was a 21-year-old computer science student at the University of Helsinki when he decided in 1991 to write a version of the Unix operating system for his IBM-compatible personal computer. It was a little project sparked by his dislike of Microsoft’s DOS software and his desire to create an operating system--the software that controls basic computer functions--that was stable and reliable.
The operating system that he invented is now known as Linux (the name is a combination of Linus and Unix).
And Linux’s use has skyrocketed over the last few years, particularly for powerful computers, known as servers, that store and transmit Web pages.
International Data Corp., a market research firm, estimated that Linux made up about 16% of all operating system shipments last year. But that figure fails to fully describe Linux’s growth because many copies of the program are simply downloaded for free off the Internet.
Little did Torvalds know that his project would become such an icon of the “open source” movement, whose goal is to create free software available to anyone worldwide. As Linux’s popularity has grown, it has become one of the few challengers to the dominance of Microsoft’s Windows operating system.
Torvalds, a soft-spoken and down-to-earth engineer, has become one of the luminaries of the Internet because of Linux and his steady hand in guiding the continuing development of the program.
He left his native Finland in 1997 to work at Transmeta, a secretive Silicon Valley chip-design start-up partially funded by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen.
Torvalds was interviewed last week while he was in Los Angeles to speak at USC at the WebRush II conference on wireless technology.
Q: What is the project you are working on at Transmeta?
A: We’ve been very, very secretive, and I can’t tell you much about what we’re doing. We did open up to the degree that we announced when we will start talking about what we’re doing. The exact date is like Jan. 19.
We think we’re doing something that no one has ever done before, so we are . . . trying to keep the technology end of it silent until we’re ready to release. Right now, we only tell three facts: We’re doing a CPU [central processing unit, the brains of a computer]. It’s based on a strong software component. And it’s especially for mobile markets. The code name is Crusoe. Like Robinson Crusoe.
*
Q: Is that a hint?
A: No, I think the name was mainly an issue of having something that was recognizable and easily remembered. It’s a low-power CPU and that’s about all I can say.
*
Q: After creating Linux, which has become such an icon of the movement to create free, open software, how does it feel to work for such a secretive company?
A: For me, open source hasn’t been a philosophy per se. It hasn’t been a goal in itself. I think that open source is a very solid means to reach other goals. There is an ideological point to it as well, but that is . . . an added bonus. I’m an engineer who really likes the notion of open source. But I never had any philosophical problems with working with a company that is very tight-lipped. Linux is what I do for fun. It’s what I do because I think it’s important. It’s what I do because I just love working on computers. When I do something for fun, I think it’s important to share with others and make that part of the fun. At the same time, when I do something for work, that’s my work. I think open source is a very good medium for doing certain things. At the same time, it’s very clear that it’s sometimes easier to do things in a closed area. So you kind of have to balance the advantages of open source versus the advantages of being closed. I’m actually hoping that a lot of what Transmeta is doing will eventually be sent back to the open-source community.
*
Q: With your job at Transmeta, what is your role these days in developing Linux?
A: Most of what I do today is communications. I mean 95% of my Linux work is really reading e-mail, answering e-mail [and] talking to people. . . . Quite often, it’s just arbitration--getting the right people together and if there are clashes, trying to decide who gets to go first. I’m kind of like an independent technical person who pretty much everyone trusts, which is something important to have. That’s one of the reasons why I haven’t wanted to work for a Linux company, just because that way it wouldn’t polarize the market.
*
Q: How much time do you spend on Linux now?
A: A lot of time. I tend to work fairly long hours. Just reading e-mail basically takes three hours a day. I mean that’s just reading e-mail. And then, if you actually want to do something about that e-mail, then the time is just unbounded!
*
Q: Will you always be involved in Linux?
A: It’s been an intensely satisfying experience. It’s been satisfying on a technical level, but it’s also been satisfying on the personal level, just feeling that you accomplished something and being part of a community. But I probably won’t work on Linux forever. Especially now, it’s clear even to outsiders that it’s much, much larger than this one person. . . . These days it’s clear that people are getting much more comfortable and at some point, who knows, five, 10 years from now. . . . It’s just clear that I don’t have that much to bring to the table anymore.
*
Q: What do you think about the commercialization of Linux by companies like Red Hat and Caldera?
A: I’ve been very happy with what’s happened commercially because it turns out that commercial Linux vendors are not interested at all in the same things that I and typical developers are interested in. And they fill a real need. It’s very clear that when I look at how it was before the commercial people got involved, Linux was much more unbalanced. It was great technology, but at the same time it was too much of being just technology. With the vendors coming in, suddenly it becomes much more of a whole product.
*
Q: Have you financially benefited from the success of Linux?
A: Not really. Some of the early [Linux] vendors actually sent me some checks just to show their gratitude and someone calculated that I had an hourly wage of about 5 cents an hour. Even though I didn’t benefit financially from Linux itself, the kind of indirect benefits were good. I mean how many people fresh out of school can basically select what place they go to work? I [also] got some stock options from some companies. It’s noticeable, but it’s not that much. It’s just at the point where we’re finally considering buying a house. In Silicon Valley, that’s actually a big deal.
*
Q: Do you regret making Linux open source?
A: The fact is that if I hadn’t made it open source, if I hadn’t done it like I did, Linux wouldn’t be where it is today and so I wouldn’t be rich anyway! I would probably be very upset if it wasn’t for the fact that I get more credit than I probably deserve, right? There’s been thousands of people working on Linux, and I get credit for a lot of it.
*
Q: What did you think about U.S. District Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson’s findings that Microsoft is a monopoly?
A: I was actually surprised by the findings of fact. I mean I was surprised by just the length of it and I was also surprised by the fact that it was very readable English. It’s actually worth reading!
The single biggest positive thing I’ve seen is that people are . . . aware of the fact that Bill Gates may be the richest man on the Earth, but it’s not really the American Dream. Before the lawsuit started, a lot of people in the technical sector were upset about Microsoft, but your average person on the street didn’t know and didn’t care, not because they condoned bad business practices, but because they just weren’t aware of alternatives. It’s been great PR for Linux. I don’t like Microsoft’s way of doing business. It’s not that they’re evil; it’s just what happens when you grow big.
