On Mon, 2012-07-02 at 17:32 +0530, Roshan Mathews wrote: > > congratulations - I am sure you went through each of these links to > find > > out where they were on the site, in what context they were there, > > whether they were put there by the authors of the site and how > visible > > they are to the viewers of the site. > > > > Those were just some random stats I found after reading your original > FUD. But then, I'm sure that when you were saying "site" and not > "page", you went through all the sites to do your due diligence?
yes I did - spent some hours looking at the sites in question from the end user perspective to get an overall impression on how much importance is given to linux. > > > And here's one more which you can add to your collection of useless > > statistics: > > > > site:microsoft.com linux 322,000 > > > > Why is that useless? this one is better site:microsoft.com how to remove linux 28,800 results > According to the Linux Foundation [1], Microsoft > was one of the largest corporate contributors of Linux in 2011. > > [1] > http://arstechnica.com/business/2012/04/linux-kernel-in-2011-15-million-total-lines-of-code-and-microsoft-is-a-top-contributor/ > > I am sure you read all the comments on this article. And of course the original pdf from the linux foundation. <quote> It is amusing to note that Linus Torvalds (1,113 total changes, 231 since 2.6.35) does not appear in either top-30 list of contributors. </quote> wow - $bill contributes more to the kernel than Linus! In general, it is a fallacy to equate number of lines of code contributed to contribution as such. A lot of other factors need to be considered - these factors are adequately explained in the pdf and in the comments on the article itself. 1% of the total contributed code - where the contribution is completely self serving ... -- regards Kenneth Gonsalves _______________________________________________ ILUGC Mailing List: http://www.ae.iitm.ac.in/mailman/listinfo/ilugc
