Brian Behlendorf Quotes

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.

We have a very active testing community which people don't often think about when you have open source.

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

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

While I personally believe strongly in the philosophy and ideology of the Free Software movement, you can't win people over just on philosophy; you have to have a better product, too.

In true open source development, there's lots of visibility all the way through the development process.

I do get my pizzas paid for by Linux indirectly.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

It's hard to propose a $100 laptop for a world community of kids and then not say in the same breath that you're going to depend on the community to make software for it.

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.

I think the wonderful thing about vi is that it has such a good market share because we gave it away.

In open source, you really have to be near the watershed to have an impact on the source code. Customers want to be near the key contributors to the code, not a level removed.

We're not done yet, but two things WordPress has been able to exemplify is that open source can create great user experiences and that it's possible to have a successful commercial entity and a wider free software community living and working in harmony.

I obviously think that freely available software can not only keep up with the evolution of commercial software, but often exceed what you can do commercially.

I'd argue that everybody wants to do something that matters, and the fact that Linux has had a huge impact on the tech market and is used virtually everywhere is obviously very personally satisfying. I think programming is fun, and the community around the kernel is great, but a project has to be relevant too.

Of course, it's hard to support full-time programmers, so we do get funds from a set of companies that are interested in the health of the Mozilla project and so are willing to support the people working for the Foundation as well.

Basically, if reverse engineering is banned, then a lot of the open source community is doomed to fail.

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.

There were open source projects and free software before Linux was there. Linux in many ways is one of the more visible and one of the bigger technical projects in this area, and it changed how people looked at it because Linux took both the practical and ideological approach.

When I first got into technology I didn't really understand what open source was. Once I started writing software, I realized how important this would be.