Slashdot Mirror
Tucows BSD Section Goes Down in Flames
BSD Today ran a comment on Tucows shutting down the Tucows BSD Section after flames from the BSD community about the misinformation they had on the site. Tucows says that they cannot meet the demands of all the "factions" within the BSD camp. It's a cop-out in my opinion; BSD Today and Daemon News seem to do it fine. All any of us asked for was for the inflammatory pro-linux/anti-BSD flavor of it to be toned down, and the misinformation cleared up. DaemonNews also carries some appropriate comments.
Basically, it's easy to sum up this situation: you reap what you sow.
I'm not sure what people expect when they go around being insane zealots, getting in someone's face when they mess up one iota, etc ...But Tucows shows one example: they stop providing a free service.
I urge people to read or re-read the Linux Advocacy howto here. Perhaps if everyone's a little more cordial and constructive with their critisism we can keep companies interested in providing free services to the BSD/Linux/etc communities.
Exocet Industries - Taking over the world, one computer at a
Sorry to say it, but their BSD site was utter garbage.
I'm not kidding.
I've got a few BSD servers, I'm running Linux on my workstation, I love both. TUCOWS did a great job with Linuxberg, but their feeble attempt at a BSD site did WAY more harm than good.
Did any of you complaining about the BSD community actually visit the site before they shut it down? It sucked. It really sucked.
It had potential, if they had had a few people who actually used and believed in BSD products. They didn't. They slapped it together, made gross inaccurate statements about BSD, and never chnged their ways.
Sorry, it had to be said. If it had been a Linux site, the Linux community would have chewed them out at least as badly.
For the sweet love of God, you BSD nuts have all sorts of good things going for you but you continue to shoot yourself in the foot.
Shooting yourself in the foot is a habit common to all freenix types, not just BSD. If you step out of the Linux camp and view the perspective from a neutral vantage point, you'll see that penguinistas are every bit as petty and irrational as the daemonics.
1)Lets see, you have what, 8 or 9 different version, openBSD, freeBSD, etcBSD... so there is a nice selection available.
And how many Linux distros are there? (there's only 5 or 6 BSDs) Before you say that Linux is just a kernel that hasn't forked, I'm talking about distributions. Or if you will, the "GN" portion of "LiGNuX".
2) You have an old slow file system, so newbies don't get intimidated by anything happening too fast.
A myth. As completely untrue as the myth that Linux uses the BSD TCP/IP stack.
So... why can't you guys stop acting like a red headed buck toothed stepchild and just friggin calm down a bit.
Okay, let's turn the tables around and imagine what the typical penguinista would have done if: TuCows had on a prominent review of Debian GNU/Linux on their *Linux* site with a) a download link to pointing to Redhat, b) the assertion that Debian was released under the BSD license, c) there were no applications available for it, and d) the conclusion that the user should stick with Windows because Debian is too hard.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
I really hope that this doesn't deteriorate into more BSD vs. Linux wars. This is the type of thing that has divided the Unix community for so many years and it's time for it to stop. Sys V vs. BSD; emacs vs. vi; Motif vs. OpenLook; Gnome vs. KDE; and on and on and on. Look, everybody, can't you see we're all on the same side here? I know that rivalry and competetion are good, but there's a certain point where it becomes destructive. This balkanization oftentimes hurts the Unix community as a whole. In this day and age of MS dominating nearly every market, if we can't rally together for a common cause, then I think we're just doomed in the long run.
Linux and BSD each have their strengths and weaknesses. Use them where they are most appropriate. It doesn't have to be an either/or situation.
Admit nothing, deny everything and make counter-accusations.
did you people read their inflamatory and thoughroughly incorrect articles supposedly "pro-BSD"?
Please people, inform yourselfs before u comment...
See here
see their crap??
I had never paid any attention to the BSD section until this came up. Looking at it, I went back and read the previous news & editorials from TuCows.
It's my belief they should have called the section "BSD sucks, and here's why."
I read *every* article they posted, and was hard pressed to find *one* good statement about BSD. Not one! The best I could find was along the lines of "Yes, A is good, but it comes with B, and that sucks, so go use Linux instead".
That's not *BSD infighting. It's *TuCows sucking. If I were a BSD user (which I used to be), I sure wouldn't frequent that site. Even their "here's something cool for BSD" ends up with "but it still sucks".
TuCows seemed to be doing a better job at trying to scare away new users than anything else. Supporting existing users, they definitely didn't even approach it with their news & editorials section.
How can you trust a group that insults its audience and its audience's product all the time?
Misinformation is abundant.
BSDi is a company, not an OS. It's also a new company formed from the merger of BSDI and Walnut Creek CDROM. BSDi's product now, as it was when it was BSDI, is BSD/OS. BSD/OS has never been open.
BSD/OS and the *BSDs do all share a common heritage, specifically 4.4BSDLite2, the last to come out of the CSRG at Berkeley.
It was a few former members of the CSRG who went on to found BSDI and sell BSD/OS. At the same time, Bill Jolitz's 386BSD became stagnant, so two other projects each independantly of each other took it and became NetBSD and FreeBSD. There was no infighting between these two groups, they just each started their own _on_ their own.
The only split due to infighting is OpenBSD's creation, which has been well documented.
TrustedBSD is not a _new_ version, but a name given to a set of extensions that Robert Watson (Remember, that guy with the interview last week?) is working on for INCLUSION into FreeBSD's main tree.
Note that this is not a flame, but an attempt to correct misinformation. If I do not, it will propogate. Others will read your post and think "yeah! What's with TrustedBSD splitting!? Damn those BSD users!". Don't think it can't happen? It does, every day, and sites like Tucows' BSD section made it possible.
The tone of the feedback one gets is directly related to the tone of the content being reviewed. Tucows got back what they put into it.
Which brings us to your "what a surprise comment." It was inflamatory and any negative response you get regarding it is well deserved. And so what if there *are* three (Only the free ones count when talking about segregation and splitting) flavors of BSD? There's several dozen Linux distributions. And yes, I've heard all the reasons why the segregation of Linux was felt to be neccesary.
Wait, no I haven't.
--
--
My comments and opinions completely reflect those of anyone and anything I am remotely associated with.
Toned it all the way down, didn't they?
Best Slashdot Co
Keep in mind that as a BSD user, I can see thinking alot less hard about firing off an insulting and picky email at tucows (ie, corperation, started off with windows, etc .. ) than any of the BSD sites.
.. just, aimed at the gnubie, which is to be expected from the type of user base tucows attracts.
Ie, the BSD sites probably get the benifit of the doubt when a BSDer considers 'correcting' misinformation found on those sites than that of tucows. I have no doubt people would have relished grilling tucows on relatively small points than the BSD sites. Incidentally, although I dont read them, they are probably at least more biased and non-objective when it comes to summerizing support and ease-of-use issues related to the various flavours of BSD than tucows would have been.
If anyone really thinks that a collection of individuals at tucows were really out to kill *BSD or to turn the average user away from trying out a *BSD OS (the existance of which, ironically, would have been keeping them employed), I think it's just another case of people being a little to lovey-lovey with their OS of choice. From what I saw of the points under scrutiny, I don't think they were wildly unfair
If something has never been said/seen/heard before, best stop to think about why that is.
"Old man yells at systemd"
Okay, not the insanely obviously wrong ones like `*BSD is GPLed', but there's nothing `wrong' or `pro Linux, anti-BSD' with saying stuff like the following:
/stand/sysinstall."
"OpenBSD support is limited"
Compared to Linux, it is. In turn, Linux support is also limited in size when compared to Windows. That doesn't mean your platform is bad. It just means that there's less support. Its true, deal with it.
"Support for NetBSD is minimal at best."
Compared to FreeBSD [biog in ISPs] and OpenBSD [big it security circles], support for NetBSD is tiny.
"There is no official commercial support for NetBSD at this time. "
Well, that may be true. I don't know. Keep in mind the word official
"The OpenBSD installation process is "not very friendly, in fact its downright hostile.""
Um, this is true. Don't get cut up over it, acknowledge it, fix it, and prove your maturity. This isn't pro Linux anti-BSD ism. Debian's and Red hat's installers suck too.
OpenBSD is "a very difficult system to configure and use since no configuration front-end exists like FreeBSD's
Well, was it obvious to the user? This is a mistake, but it might have been an honest one. No tool exists unless it is obvious to most users it is there. coming from the Linux world, one sees this repeatedly with Linux distributions that hide their confioguration tools from their menus. The newbioe isn't being dumb, they're beiong logical -if they ain't showing it to me, it probably doesn't exist. A fair enough assumption to make. People rarely read documentation.
Configuring NetBSD is "an adventure every time."
The NetBSD installer is not for timid -- "it is an old style text based installer."
Oh, cmon - how are you gonna argue this isn't the case?
"NetBSD applications support is minimal as well."
Um, yes. Comapred to Free and Open, yes. Sorry, its a fact of Life. I'm a Linux user. Linux application support is also pretty minimal comapred to Windows or MacOS.
"NetBSD support for network applications, such as ICQ and messenger clients, is seriously lacking."
It is. Not everyone wants to port and compile source. Not everyone knows C. Most people don't. Slashdot is the only place where end-users don't exist, and you can tell somebody to `code it themself'.
"NetBSD is a very minimal operating system."
It is. It lacks most of the polish that most users expect [even system administrators - remember, more people use NT than Unix precisely for that reason]. Stop bitching that this isn't the case. Either shut up and tell them you like minimalism, or try and make it even less minimal than it is today, just to proove them wrong.
...he of "Dyn-O-Mite!" fame. Talking about Northern Ireland:
"You've got Protestants killing Catholics, Catholics killing Protestants. I guess it goes to show you -- without Blacks or Jews, people will improvise!"
If you were trying to do something constructive, and put honest effort into it, you'd expect SOME reward for doing so.
At least, you'd expect nobody to fault you for your creative efforts.
But what if, while you were going about your stuff, you had a large crowd of people standing around you, shouting insults, throwing beer cans at you, and pointedly making the case that despite the fact that you are TRYING to get something done, you can't possibly do the job as well as THEY, even though THEY aren't doing it?
Wouldn't that just piss you off? Would you want to keep going?
So we have a bunch of snooty, nose-in-the-air types who just can't seem to accept being belittled to the level of (gasp!) TUCOWS, who also work with (HEH!) WINDOWS SOFTWARE!, who've spoiled an ally in their cause, and halted a nice effort.
I wonder how many of these intensely critical remarks came from people who just figured out how to boot BSD?
Way to go, guys! Hope you're proud!
Let this be a lesson: You'll catch a HELL of alot more bees with honey than with vinegar...
-Ben
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
To quote from Tucows:
When Tucows periodically gets something "wrong" on the BSD site, we receive a barrage of angry user comments. Paradoxically, when we use this advice to make adjustments we receive an equally prolific battering from other BSD factions indicating that we had it correct to begin with. Any attempt to provide a middle ground only results in hostility from all sides.
Boy, this doesn't sound like the Slashdot crowd *I* know...
Moon Macrosystems. Sun's biggest competitor.
1 - Divide the /. comunity into two sides (WinLeft/WinRight)
2 - WinRight bombards tucows with insults and "suggestions" for improving their Windows Section.
3 - WinLeft Creats a petition site claiming "Tucows is going downhill" and "What's with all the changes!"
4 - WinRight emails tucows declaring that WinLeft are a bunch of wacked out OSS advocates, and should be ignored
5 - WinLeft rubutts with "WinRight are all Linux Zealots, just trying to screw the system" Followed by a massive flame mail/DDOS attacks.
6 - WinRight Starts massive mail-bomb campaign against tucows.
7 - WinLeft Counters with a "Manifesto" delivered to Tucows re: "The Diminishing Quality, and overall suckieness of the Tucows Windows Section" Boycott Proposed, more flames.
8 - Tucows decides it is all too much for their poor support staff.
Voilla, no more windows section on Tucows, more room for Atari ROMs and Mac Software.
I am become Troll, destroyer of threads
I guess the webmasters got tired of all the little red devils scaring both cows all the time.