No, Linux was not. The GNU Hurd was. These are two completely different projects started by two completely different sets of people (well, a group of people with RMS at the helm, and then separately Linus Torvalds, to be more accurate) with two wildly different sets of motivations.
I suspect that Linus has come around to the idea that there is a LOT of benefit to the philosophical side of things (i.e. "libre licensing" vs "open source") but insofar as the initial motivation to create what each created... yeah, two very different things.
In line with what you said here, let me dissect this in a slightly different way.Hoser Rob wrote: ↑Sat Aug 27, 2022 9:12 amLinux was intended to be on open source Unix compatible plugin kernel.
GNU/Linux, which is what is actually being referred to when most people say 'Linux', is not the same as the Linux Kernel Project, but it is totally pararitic on it. No Linux kenrel, no GNU/Linux. Period.
If we only look at the environment that was trying to be created (leaving aside all philosophical aspects) what was intended was a "public UNIX" OS. UNIX has never been associated with small-time, low-end hardware. Back in the day, multi-thousand-dollar workstations had difficulty running it, and were largely limited to having no GUI at all. It would take AGES for the hardware to catch up with the demand being placed on it by multi-tasking, multi-user, protected-memory operating systems, all of which were the hallmark of UNIX-type OSs, and also therefore GNU Hurd. Linus, separately, had intended to write his own OS, and he'd also intended in essence for it to be a UNIX-type OS.
The only reason that today, in the year 2022, that we tend to lose sight of this fact is the evolution of computer hardware to such an extent that everything being sold today sits well above the baseline requirements necessary to run UNIX-type OSs (this includes Linux, macOS, NT-class Windows, HP-UX, etc.)
Initially, it really was just a bunch of individuals pursuing their own self-interests doing all the contribution to the development of what we now call GNU+Linux. Once various companies of all kinds of sizes started seeing the value in it by the late 1990s, World-Wide Corporate has been contributing, whether that's money, labor, or both. The more they all contribute, the more skin they have in the game as well as the greater the collective self-interest benefit they realize from it, and as a result of those sorts of factors in addition to individuals still contributing on their own, GNU+Linux is the OS we know today. And absolutely had corporations the world over not gotten into the act, it's hard to imagine the level of development we benefit from every day being present. That's an undeniable fact, and one in which you and I are in 100% agreement. It's kind of like during the daytime on a day which is clear and cloudless (or thereabouts) the sky is blue, and it's blue not because you want it to be, or I want it to be, or even that you and I agree that it is; and moreover it will continue to persist in being blue even if we hate it or if we don't believe that it is. In other words, the state is an objective fact.ANd the Linux Kernel Project is a foundation paid for by many of the biggest companies in the tech world. Microsoft has been one of them for years. They don't give a tinker's damn about old hardware, they have enough to do with the new stuff.
Corporations are tools of advanced civilizations, nothing more and nothing less. They're a thing which can be used for good or for ill (just like a hammer or a shovel or a knife) and on their own, that's fine. However, corporations are nothing without humans to create, form, and run them, and I for one have lived more than long enough to know they're not ever to be trusted, at least not blindly.Really, all this long winded pompous pseudointellectual deluded anticorporate Linux blather is tiresome.