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.

OS X is sweet: it's simple and intuitive, and I think GNOME shares a lot of values with it.

Red Carpet Enterprise has been really well received since one guy can install it in about an hour, and it makes it trivial to deal with software management issues like deploying updates and creating standard package sets for your various machines.

There are a lot of people who've been able to ditch their Windows machines and switch over to Linux because they can now use their Exchange server for calendaring and collaboration from their Linux desktop.

A lot of that momentum comes from the fact that Linux is free.

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.

We plan to support Exchange 2003 as soon as it is released. We already have the prerelease versions from MSDN.

This is what people need: an easy-to-deploy, easy-to-use tool.

We're not going to make Evolution or any of our other products depend on Mono anytime in the near future.

It's probably fair to say that the ratio of time our Connector developers spend in the debugger versus the Emacs buffer is higher than with most software.

Red Carpet has a nice package abstraction layer that allows us to support RPMs and DEBs transparently.

If Microsoft ever does applications for Linux it means I've won.

There are a lot of people who've been able to ditch their Windows machines and switch over to Linux because they can now use their Exchange server for calendaring and collaboration from their Linux desktop.

And when the time comes to replace the O2 I have today, maybe my next machine will run Linux.

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.

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.

Linux has definitely made a lot of sense even in a purely materialistic sense.

The thing with Linux is that the developers themselves are actually customers too: that has always been an important part of Linux.

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.

See, you not only have to be a good coder to create a system like Linux, you have to be a sneaky bastard too.

I like to think that I've been a good manager. That fact has been very instrumental in making Linux a successful product.

A lot of that momentum comes from the fact that Linux is free.

Mostly I use the O2 as an X terminal, however, running my apps on Linux and displaying remotely.

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.

Cosmoe works on any of the standard filesystems available for Linux.

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.

We all love Linux, but it's also a fact that some people might not be able to migrate.

I think that by October the whole company has to migrate to OpenOffice, and then I think it's by June next year we all migrate to Linux - you don't want to migrate 6,000 people both operating system and office suite in a single jump.

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.

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.

I've been employed by the University of Helsinki, and they've been perfectly happy to keep me employed and doing Linux.

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!

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.

All the best people in life seem to like LINUX.

In some cases we've been building tools that are specific to Linux for the desktop, and they only work on Linux, but I see two major projects that are wildly, wildly successful: Mozilla and OpenOffice, and those two programs are cross platform.

I don't expect to go hungry if I decide to leave the University. Resume: Linux looks pretty good in many places.

Linux is a cancer that attaches itself in an intellectual property sense to everything it touches.

I very seldom worry about other systems. I concentrate pretty fully on just making Linux the best I can.

I've never regretted not making Linux shareware: I really don't like the pay for use binary shareware programs.

I think Linux is a great thing, because Linux is an alternative to Windows, and because, of all the operating systems that are at all relevant today, Unix is the best of a bad lot.

The Linux philosophy is 'Laugh in the face of danger'. Oops. Wrong One. 'Do it yourself'. Yes, that's it.

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.

Making Linux GPL'd was definitely the best thing I ever did.

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 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.

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.

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.

That's what makes Linux so good: you put in something, and that effort multiplies. It's a positive feedback cycle.

I do get my pizzas paid for by Linux indirectly.