I just got finished reading an interesting article by a Dr. R. Keith Sawyer in which he concludes that Linux is not innovative. He based his conclusions in the fact that Linux is just a derivative of Unix. He also mentions to his delight that his thoughts have upset some in the Linux community. I wonder why?

How does one determine innovation in the first place? Using this man’s conclusions, one could say that Henry Ford was not innovative since he didn’t invent the automobile. Yet Ford was the first to mass produce the motor vehicle, thus he was, in fact, innovative in his own right.

One could also argue that Microsoft is not innovative. Microsoft didn’t invent DOS; it bought it from another company. Windows therefore is not innovative since it was Apple who originally introduced the GUI. Microsoft Word is not innovative because there was other word processing software before it became mainstream. Look at Internet Explorer, which is also not innovative, since there were Netscape and Mosaic before it.

How about Apple? Isn’t Apple a derivative of Unix as well? Why wasn’t this mentioned? One could also conclude that the iPhone is not innovative since Apple didn’t invent the phone. Nike didn’t invent the tennis shoe, the Wright brothers didn’t invent the idea of flying, Dell didn’t invent the computer, and anything I write is not innovative since I didn’t invent blogging. 🙂

I guess my point is that it irritates me to no end when someone can twist the truth to justify his or her own existence on this planet. Everyone knows that the only REAL people who deserve Dr. in front of their names are those who have completed medical school, after all. Listening to anyone who has spent the majority of his or her adult life hiding in school, learning how to parrot the ideas of others, than passing this dribble on as truth is not innovative at all.

Comments welcome.

[tags]linux, microsoft, dell, apple, opinions, innovative[/tags]