"As Chicago Mayor Harold Washington said of the corrupt former Mayor Daley, "I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone." Nobody deserves to have to die -- not Jobs, not Mr. Bill, not even people guilty of bigger evils than theirs. But we all deserve the end of Jobs' malign influence on people's computing."

And? I mean, it's tasteless right after his death, but is it equivalence to personal attack and intimation?

Is the world black and white, and if someone says even one negative thing, then it's a full equivalence?

You can delete the Stallman reference, and the point still stands.

"As Chicago Mayor Harold Washington said of the corrupt former Mayor Daley, 'I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone.' Nobody deserves to have to die – not Jobs, not Mr. Bill, not even people guilty of bigger evils than theirs. But we all deserve the end of Jobs' malign influence on people's computing."

Clearly, that was an angry denouncement... /sarcasm

No, it was passive aggressive bullshit, hidden in eloquent crap. The very thing Linus tries to avoid.

Seemed to be pretty obvious truth to me. Steve Jobs has created an ecosystem that is far more locked down than the 1984 he envisioned in the original Mac Ad. He has ushered in an era of computing in which the general purpose device is giving way to a device where you don't even control what content you can put on it.

We used to think that DRM on desktop PCs was bad, but for mobile devices it's 10x worse.

Now, see how I just explained the issue with Steve Jobs, instead of saying "He was a piece of shit who passed of Woz's work as his own, lied to him about money, denied paternity of his daughter, verbally abused employees and kept them in a state of fear, maintained an 'enemy list' of journalists, .....!" That's inflammatory rhetoric, and not relevant. The only thing that is relevant is the sea change in DRM'ed computing platforms have been popularized and his role in them, which is what Stallman was alluding too -- the effects of his leadership.