Nicholas Negroponte Quotes

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

The beauty of open-source is that you can pick up right where someone left off and start right there.

A lot of people who work on open-source software don't mind making money elsewhere. They aren't anticommercial.

All of our code is open source, so it can be used for other projects.

The more money Automattic makes, the more we invest into Free and Open Source software that belongs to everybody and services to make that software sing.

I want people to use Perl. I want to be a positive ingredient of the world and make my American history. So, whatever it takes to give away my software and get it used, that's great.

Certainly I get a lot personally out of it as well, there's the recognition and things like that but mostly I try to take that as an opportunity to explain why I hope we could see more projects like Apache out there and why it's a good thing for society.

One thing about open source is that even the failures contribute to the next thing that comes up. Unlike a company that could spend a million dollars in two years and fail and there's nothing really to show for it, if you spend a million dollars on open source, you probably have something amazing that other people can build on.

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.

The accomplishment of open source is that it is the back end of the web, the invisible part, the part that you don't see as a user.

I do get my pizzas paid for by Linux indirectly.

I think operating systems work best if they're free and open. Particular applications are more likely to be proprietary.

People sometimes ask me if it is a sin in the Church of Emacs to use vi. Using a free version of vi is not a sin; it is a penance. So happy hacking.

Ubuntu is doing amazing things, and I think it's going to change the face of the desktop.

In open source, we feel strongly that to really do something well, you have to get a lot of people involved.

So that's my main role right now and really the politics also includes going out and communicating to the world why Apache is a good thing, why companies should be involved in it, and why individuals should be involved in it too.

As the web becomes more and more of a part of our every day lives, it would be a horrible tragedy if it was locked up inside of companies and proprietary software.

Companies have been trying to figure out what it is that makes open source work.

In open-source in general, the power lies in connecting the author of the software directly to users, eliminating the middleman.

One of the arguments here at OLPC is, if 100 million kids could have an Asus running Windows, is that better with two million kids running the XO? And the answer is yes. We want kids connected and the largest possible number is the goal.

I would encourage nonproprietary standards for tools and libraries.

I think, fundamentally, open source does tend to be more stable software. It's the right way to do things.

Many people think that open source projects are sort of chaotic and and anarchistic. They think that developers randomly throw code at the code base and see what sticks.

I started working on OpenBSD, and many earlier projects, because I have always felt that vendor systems were not designed for quality.

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