"I've never regretted not making Linux shareware: I really don't like the pay for use binary shareware programs"
About this Quote
The line distills a foundational choice behind Linux: a rejection of the pay-per-copy, binary-only culture that dominated personal computing in the early 1990s. Shareware popularized the idea of distributing limited binaries and asking users to pay to unlock or continue using the program. That model not only put a tollbooth in front of software but also hid the source code, discouraging learning, tinkering, and collective improvement. Torvalds went the other way. Linux was quickly placed under the GNU General Public License, turning the kernel into an open, collaborative commons where anyone could read, modify, and redistribute the code, provided those freedoms stayed intact downstream.
The preference is not purely idealistic. A kernel thrives on trust, scrutiny, and rapid iteration across countless hardware platforms. Binary-only releases slow debugging, block portability, and concentrate power in vendors who can withhold fixes or abandon users. Open code aligns incentives: users become co-developers, companies can contribute drivers and improvements upstream, and everyone benefits from shared maintenance. That engine of collective problem-solving made Linux reliable infrastructure rather than a product gated by a paywall.
Torvalds has long taken a pragmatic stance on free software, favoring what works over moral grandstanding. He is not anti-commerce; he is anti-friction. By avoiding shareware, he enabled business models built on services, support, hardware, and cloud platforms instead of charging for copies. The result speaks for itself: Linux underpins servers, supercomputers, Android phones, and embedded devices, with a development pipeline that absorbs changes from a global community.
Never regretted is retrospective judgment as much as principle. A binary shareware kernel would have fractured the ecosystem, slowed adoption, and stifled the very curiosity that drove Linux forward. Open code let hackers learn, vendors integrate, and users trust their systems. The license choice set the social and technical conditions for scale, and the world that followed vindicated it.
The preference is not purely idealistic. A kernel thrives on trust, scrutiny, and rapid iteration across countless hardware platforms. Binary-only releases slow debugging, block portability, and concentrate power in vendors who can withhold fixes or abandon users. Open code aligns incentives: users become co-developers, companies can contribute drivers and improvements upstream, and everyone benefits from shared maintenance. That engine of collective problem-solving made Linux reliable infrastructure rather than a product gated by a paywall.
Torvalds has long taken a pragmatic stance on free software, favoring what works over moral grandstanding. He is not anti-commerce; he is anti-friction. By avoiding shareware, he enabled business models built on services, support, hardware, and cloud platforms instead of charging for copies. The result speaks for itself: Linux underpins servers, supercomputers, Android phones, and embedded devices, with a development pipeline that absorbs changes from a global community.
Never regretted is retrospective judgment as much as principle. A binary shareware kernel would have fractured the ecosystem, slowed adoption, and stifled the very curiosity that drove Linux forward. Open code let hackers learn, vendors integrate, and users trust their systems. The license choice set the social and technical conditions for scale, and the world that followed vindicated it.
Quote Details
| Topic | Coding & Programming |
|---|
More Quotes by Linus
Add to List
