首先，我想說，我是帶著矛盾的心情結束了兩天的Linux基金會合作峰會的，因為我不得不感激這些大企業和linux基金會，他們對Linux的發展做出了這麼多的貢獻，比如贊助Linus Torvarlds能夠專職作為Linux世界的領袖等。但是同時，我也為Linux基金會的光環感到擔憂。
本次大會是由IBM贊助的，可以說，它也是整個Linux世界的最大贊助商。而且在Linux基金會的會員名單上的成員都是來自各大IT巨頭，或者即將成為IT的公司，比如Adobe，他們最近剛剛加入Linux基金會，你可以在Linux基金會的官方網站上找到完整的名單。
這些大公司為開源事業在花錢，而且還將繼續持續下去，對Linux和開源軟件事業是一件好事，幫助了他們的發展，同樣使用Linux和開源軟件的人也是受益者。正如在對Linux基金會的執行董事Jim Zenmin的采訪中提到的，目前的linux基金會的重點是大規模的、需求復雜的Linux用戶；那些為Linux做開發的個人開發者和個人用戶，還有成千上萬的部署了開源軟件和Linux的中小企業，都不是他們目前的工作重點。
本次峰會的重點也是非常顯著的體現了這點，本次會議的議題不是服務器就是安全，或者就是高性能計算，沒有一個是Linux桌面等個人用戶比較關心的相關話題。
很顯然，大公司贊助了那些開發者，給他們發工資，贊助他們全球旅行進行開發交流等等，那麼給他們一個發言的機會那是很符合常理的。世道就是這樣，拿人家的手短，明顯的Linux內核和主要應用程序的開發人員已經受到了大企業的影響，過分的看重了企業服務器平台Linux和開源軟件的發展，而這些將大大傷害那些Linux桌面用戶，他們需要一個Linux桌面系統，而不是服務器平台。
從目前的Linux基金會的成員開看，上述情況暫時不會出現。公司事宜盈利為目的的。IBM在Lnux桌面市場繁榮的時候是不會掙多少的，但是Linux服務器市場的繁榮可以給他帶來大把的票子。HP和Dell則是在和微軟的合作，在桌面用戶平台售出大量的桌面windows系統，他們也掙的非常多，所以目前來看，Linux想要在桌面市場有所突破看來是很難了。
但是，目前Linux基金會的成員中也有小部分在做Linux桌面的市場工作，但是他們更多的是在廉價筆記本電腦和花裡胡哨的發行版領域裡奔波，但是掙的也就是服務器廠商們的零頭了。
原文內容：
I came away from the second annual Linux Foundation Collaboration Summit with mixed feelings. I mean, it's hard not to support the group that pays Linus Torvalds to spend his time continuing to lead the poster-boy project for free and open source software. But at the same time, those golden chains are my biggest concern about the Linux Foundation.
IBM sponsored the event, and they are the biggest supporter of Linux in the corporate world. The foundation membership is made up of almost all the large and and many of wanna-be-large IT firms around the globe -- including Adobe, which is one of the foundation's newest members. You can find a complete list of members on the foundation website.
There is no doubt that the time and money the corporate world has spent -- and keeps spending -- to support Linux development has been beneficial to Linux, and therefore to all of us who use the platform. When world-class IT gurus like Torvalds are freed from the demands of a day job not directly related to kernel issues, it's a good thing for all of us. Likewise work on projects like the LSB, which can smooth a few rough edges keeping some from adoption. But still, I worry about the price.
As pointed out in Robin Miller's video interview with Linux Foundation Executive Director Jim Zemlin, the Linux Foundation at present is focused on a core group of large, sophisticated Linux users, not on the needs of individual users and developers or the thousands of small-to-medium-sized companies using or developing software for Linux. Zemlin also notes that the great thing about open source is that anyone who wants to can start their own organization or foundation, and suggests that if the Linux Foundation is not right for some, they should do just that. While Zemlin's comments helped to clarify the Linux Foundation's immediate goals and practices, it didn't really quiet my discomfort.
Before I learned that the press was not welcome in any of the working-meetings at the summit on days 2 and 3, I saw and heard rumblings of discontent from more than one ordinary Linux desktop user. One example: a top-ten list of inhibitors to Linux adoption, created by a committee of foundation members, contained nothing at all relating to desktop usage. Nothing. Everything on the list was about back-room usage. Servers. Big iron.
Wi-fi drivers were mentioned in passing, but not addressed as an action item. Jittery notebook keyboards/track pad/sundry rodents weren't mentioned at all. Those two items are certainly on my top-ten list of inhibitors to adoption, but not on theirs.
It's only natural that the people who are paying developers hard cash and paying kernel folks' travel and documentation and system administration costs want to have a say in what those kernel folk and application developers are focusing on. This is the way things are supposed to work. The problem is, or may become, that the close relationship between core Linux developers and large IT firms may overshadow the wants and needs of those who want Linux to become the best desktop platform, not just the best server platform.
With the current makeup of the Linux Foundation membership, that may never happen. The money people are concerned about money. IBM won't make more money if Linux does well on the desktop, but they will if it does better on big iron. HP and Dell make so much money from selling Windows on desktops that they have precious little motivation to work harder to see Linux grow in that space. That's fine, too.
That is, that's fine unless the wants and desires of IBM, HP, Dell -- substitute any other members names for any of those three, I use them out of familiarity, not to pick on them -- so totally dominate the time and the efforts of free software developers that Linux never gets to the next level as a desktop platform. Money talks. And when Linux Foundation money says do this, and this means backroom stuff, then the desktop will continue to get short shrift.
Now, there are firms interested in seeing Linux do well on the desktop. But by and large they are the smaller firms among the foundation's membership. They are trying to make a go with small, cheap laptops or eye-pleasing desktop distributions. And they don't bring the same money to the table that the big boys do.
What's the answer to this dilemma? I don't know. But I do worry over it. So does Paul Elliott, a longtime member and officer of the Austin Linux Users Group. He read about the summit in the local paper, and tried to attend. Unfortunately, he showed up on the second day and attempted to register as a journalist, when the press was no longer welcome in the talks and workshops. He blogged about his unhappiness with the experience on the LUG's website.
It doesn't make good business sense to have reporters sniffing around business meetings. I won't argue with that. To a corporation, information needs to be sanitized, not free. PR handlers need to be present when management speaks to the press. This is life in the corporate world. I don't have a problem with that, except when that same lack of transparency begins to enter the FOSS world, as it seems to have done at this Linux event. It doesn't belong here. It's not part of our culture, or our community. I worry about what we're giving up for the corporate dole.
I hope that the Linux Foundation's plans to broaden the membership base and to address the concerns of individual developers and users, as mentioned in the Zemlin interview, come to fruition, and that as they do they prove my worries to unfounded and unnecessary