Software is like sex: it's better when it's free.
Linus Torvalds
If Microsoft ever does applications for Linux it means I've won.
Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done.
Most good programmers do programming not because they expect to get paid or get adulation by the public, but because it is fun to program.
Microsoft isn't evil, they just make really crappy operating systems.
The Linux philosophy is 'Laugh in the face of danger'. Oops. Wrong One. 'Do it yourself'. Yes, that's it.
In real open source, you have the right to control your own destiny.
My name is Linus, and I am your God.
In open source, we feel strongly that to really do something well, you have to get a lot of people involved.
I often compare open source to science. To where science took this whole notion of developing ideas in the open and improving on other peoples' ideas and making it into what science is today and the incredible advances that we have had. And I compare that to witchcraft and alchemy, where openness was something you didn't do.
See, you not only have to be a good coder to create a system like Linux, you have to be a sneaky bastard too.
Any program is only as good as it is useful.
Turtles are very stable and have been around forever. But they have problems adapting. When humans came along, turtles came under serious threat. Biodiversity is good, and I think it is good in technology as well.
There are lots of Linux users who don't care how the kernel works, but only want to use it. That is a tribute to how good Linux is.
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.
People enjoy the interaction on the Internet, and the feeling of belonging to a group that does something interesting: that's how some software projects are born.
I think, fundamentally, open source does tend to be more stable software. It's the right way to do things.
The memory management on the PowerPC can be used to frighten small children.
I'd much rather have 15 people arguing about something than 15 people splitting into two camps, each side convinced it's right and not talking to the other.
I think of myself as an engineer, not as a visionary or 'big thinker.' I don't have any lofty goals.
That's what makes Linux so good: you put in something, and that effort multiplies. It's a positive feedback cycle.
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.
Making Linux GPL'd was definitely the best thing I ever did.
I've never regretted not making Linux shareware: I really don't like the pay for use binary shareware programs.
The thing with Linux is that the developers themselves are actually customers too: that has always been an important part of Linux.
In my opinion MS is a lot better at making money than it is at making good operating systems.
You won't get sued for anticompetitive behavior.
I want my office to be quiet. The loudest thing in the room - by far - should be the occasional purring of the cat.
I've actually found the image of Silicon Valley as a hotbed of money-grubbing tech people to be pretty false, but maybe that's because the people I hang out with are all really engineers.
I'm generally a very pragmatic person: that which works, works.
When you say 'I wrote a program that crashed Windows,' people just stare at you blankly and say 'Hey, I got those with the system, for free.'
Shareware tends to combine the worst of commercial software with the worst of free software.
I used to be interested in Windows NT, but the more I see it, the more it looks like traditional Windows with a stabler kernel. I don't find anything technically interesting there.
There's innovation in Linux. There are some really good technical features that I'm proud of. There are capabilities in Linux that aren't in other operating systems.
I'm sitting in my home office wearing a bathrobe. The same way I'm not going to start wearing ties, I'm also not going to buy into the fake politeness, the lying, the office politics and backstabbing, the passive aggressiveness, and the buzzwords.
To be a nemesis, you have to actively try to destroy something, don't you? Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect.
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.
The economics of the security world are all horribly, horribly nasty and are largely based on fear, intimidation and blackmail.
In many cases, the user interface to a program is the most important part for a commercial company: whether the programs works correctly or not seems to be secondary.
To be honest, the fact that people trust you gives you a lot of power over people. Having another person's trust is more powerful than all other management techniques put together.
I'm interested in Linux because of the technology, and Linux wasn't started as any kind of rebellion against the 'evil Microsoft empire.'
Programmers are in the enviable position of not only getting to do what they want to, but because the end result is so important they get paid to do it. There are other professions like that, but not that many.
I like to think that I've been a good manager. That fact has been very instrumental in making Linux a successful product.
When it comes to software, I much prefer free software, because I have very seldom seen a program that has worked well enough for my needs, and having sources available can be a life-saver.
I've been employed by the University of Helsinki, and they've been perfectly happy to keep me employed and doing Linux.
It's a personality trait: from the very beginning, I knew what I was concentrating on. I'm only doing the kernel - I always found everything around it to be completely boring.
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.
Every once in a while an issue comes up where I have to make a statement. I can't totally avoid all political issues, but I try my best to minimize them. When I do make a statement, I try to be fairly neutral.
I don't see myself as a visionary at all.
The fame and reputation part came later, and never was much of a motivator, although it did enable me to work without feeling guilty about neglecting my studies.
