Slashdot Mirror
Revolution OS
Linux users who wonder why drag-and-drop doesn't always work between applications may find themselves treated to a lengthy philosophical discourse on the difference between Gnome and KDE -- a difference they may not have known existed.
Linux users who watch the documentary Revolution OS will find themselves treated to a lengthy philosophical discourse on the difference between free software and open source software -- a difference they may also have been unaware of.
The film by J.T.S. Moore is about the growth of the free software movement, and its eventual co-option by the open source movement. I don't think that's what the movie was supposed to be about; it was supposed to be about Linux and its battle about Microsoft. But the movie is quickly hijacked by its participants and turned into a theoretical discussion, in which Linux itself is a mere sideshow.
The combatants are Richard Stallman for free software, and Eric Raymond and Bruce Perens for open source. Much of the movie is after-the-fact interviews with them, as well as other notables: Linus Torvalds, Michael Tiemann from Cygnus, Larry Augustin from VA Linux, Brian Behlendorf from Apache. Rob Malda, aka CmdrTaco of Slashdot, even makes an appearance. But the Stallman vs. Raymond/Perens debate forms the core of the movie.
All three main participants come out looking reasonably good. I think when Microsoft executives see photos of typical open source luminaries, they might feel an urge to give them a hug and a bowl of soup, rather than worry about them taking market share from Microsoft (forgetting that Bill Gates created the same impression at age 24, negotiating the deal to license DOS to IBM). But Stallman and Raymond and Perens are not like that; they have spent decades writing software and thinking about writing software, and the intellectual heft of their arguments reflect that. Stallman, in particular, gets a chance to explain at length his feelings about software and how these led to the Free Software Foundation and the GNU public license, which may be news to viewers who only know about Linux.
Heavy with interviews, the movie lacks the staple of documentaries: scenes with multiple people that are later analyzed individually by each of the participants. The main characters almost never appear together, and when they discuss the rare events at which two or more were present, they contradict each other as often as not. This is an artifact of distributed development: there are not a lot of scenes where they are together because they do not need to be together a lot.
The movie also lacks a villain, a battle of good vs. evil. Nominally Microsoft is the bad guy, but except for Bill Gates' quarter-century-old "Open Letter to Hobbyists" and a snide comment from Bruce Perens about intellectual property, it isn't clear why Microsoft is disliked. Nobody explains why Windows is worse, or Linux better. In fact, the movie demonstrates that GNU and Linux began as alternatives to expensive and proprietary hardware and software from Sun, not from Intel and Microsoft.
Even the open source vs. free software debate is presented from both sides. Since more people have heard of open source than free software, the fact that Stallman gets equal time is in a sense a victory for him over Raymond and Perens. But all three are shown acting both profound and petty, combining smugness with "aw, shucks" modesty, and attempting to claim their rightful credit without being obvious about it.
* * *
An outsider might come away from the movie with the inaccurate impression that open source is the commercialized cousin of free software. Digging a little deeper, he or she might find the Free Software Foundation's web page that attempts to clarify the issue. "While free software by any other name would give you the same freedom, it makes a big difference which name we use: different words convey different ideas. The term 'open source' quickly became associated with a different approach, a different philosophy, different values, and even a different criterion for which licenses are acceptable." However, after kicking the ideas around a bit, the article doesn't come up with any concrete differences. The site also provides a handy chart, but the "free software" and "open source" boxes intersect completely (except for the small space allocated to their names).
The two movements do have different grounding philosophies. Free software is based on four freedoms, open source is based on nine criteria. The freedoms are more general -- they could be applied to almost any creative work -- but in practice, when it comes to software, the four freedoms generate a set of rules very much like the nine criteria. Linux, the standard-bearer for open source, was released under the GPL, a license that came from free software.
While the Free Software Foundation's site devotes significant verbiage to the difference between free software and open source, the Open Source Initiative doesn't talk about free software. Its history begins (somewhat guilelessly) on February 3, 1998, the day the term "open source" was coined (an event whose location is pointed out by Larry Augustin in the movie).
This gives some insight into the difference between the two movements. The Open Source Initiative has a more pragmatic attitude, and I think this rankles the Free Software Foundation. Of course, OSI has to please various people, while the moral compass of the FSF is inseparable from that of Richard Stallman, making it easier for it to stay the true course. In the movie Eric Raymond describes the term "free software" as "lousy marketing," which if it was intended as an insult, I fear will miss the mark. As Stallman puts it, free software is "important for quality of life and the good of society." What worries the FSF about OSI is not so much the nine criteria that exist and whether they conflict with the four freedoms, but whether the tenth criteria would conflict with the fifth freedom.
In computing, with its thousand ways to do the same thing, such arguments are often termed "religious," and the comparison is not inapt. In his book What is a Jew?, Rabbi Morris Kertzer writes, "[Jewish] tradition pictures God as saying, 'It would even be all right if my children forgot me, as long as they keep my commandments.'" That is an open source attitude: who cares what is motivating you to release the source code; just release it. Free software is different. To do free software right, you gotta believe.
In the movie, neither side is completely frank during its interviews. As part of the GNU project, the FSF created every part of a working Unix system except the kernel, a gap that was filled by the Linux kernel. Linux would not exist without the GNU code (particularly the compiler), lending credence to Stallman's claim that the system should be known as "GNU/Linux," but it is disingenuous of Stallman to portray the kernel as just one part of the whole system, on par with a text editor.
Stallman appears annoyed by a lack of purity in the Linux project. Linus Torvalds had the temerity to start writing software without first working out a detailed philosophy that governed all aspects of his life. Furthermore, he used a simpler approach to kernel writing (a monolithic kernel) than what GNU was planning for its Hurd kernel (a microkernel), and more gallingly, got it working sooner and wound up having the name of his kernel be used to refer to the whole thing, a synecdochic slap in the face to Stallman.
Open source has done such a complete job of embracing and extending free software that we are treated to the sight of Richard Stallman receiving an award named after Linus Torvalds, when historical events seem to dictate the other way around as more appropriate. Stallman, to his credit, shows up to accept the award at LinuxWorld, but he cannot resist haranguing the crowd about the GNU/Linux name (a premise that Torvalds elsewhere labels "ridiculous"). Linus gets the last laugh, however, since during Stallman's rant he is being upstaged by Linus' two adorable toddlers, scooting around on the back of the stage.
* * *
Revolution OS does unearth some good background information on a few aspects of open source. We learn about Cygnus and VA Linux, two of the first companies to attempt a business model based on free software. The movie goes into some detail on Netscape's decision to open-source its browser
But Linux itself is rarely seen, missing from its own movie. The product is merely an adjunct, a manifestation of the battle between open source and free software, with both sides claiming moral ownership. When two dogs fight over a bone, you don't see the bone fight. We are never shown anyone using Linux, except for unhappy users at an Installfest. The rise of Linux is chronicled only in occasional titles, superimposed over footage of cars zooming down a road, showing the impressive rise in the numbers of users through the years. Important issues, such as what a distribution is and why there are different ones, are never addressed.
Tiemann and Augustin discuss how Linux can help customers, but they are too polished to make much of an impression amidst the geekosophical debate. Stallman and Raymond and Perens care more about the abstract fight than the market battles, and their passion drives the movie. If they developed their software to scratch an itch, it's clear they gave the interviews for this movie to scratch a different itch, the nagging feeling that someone else was trying to steal their glory.
This leads one to wonder about the movie's target audience. Open source navel gazers will enjoy matching names to faces, but the average non-technical user will probably fail to grasp the significance of most of the issues discussed. They will be left with an entertaining story, peopled by colorful characters who obviously disagree about something they feel passionate about, but the gist of the arguments will likely elude them. An executive watching the movie may also be puzzled; the term "open source" was chosen over "free software" partly to avoid the non-commercial associations that the old name evoked, but watching the internal bickering may cause some to wonder if the software is ready for prime time, or if it is best reserved for zealots willing to accept certain tradeoffs because of the feeling of moral superiority that the software engenders.
The organization that screened the movie in Seattle, the Northwest Film Forum, has two theaters, one seating 70 and one seating 48. They chose to show it in the little theater (called, in fact, the Little Theater), which seemed to me a mistake in tech-savvy Seattle, at a theater just a few miles from the University of Washington campus. Yet, despite being hyped in the Friday "What's Happening" section of the paper, only 19 people showed up for the show on a Saturday night -- mostly Linux users and their tolerant dates, as far as I could tell.
Others may have to wait a while to see the movie. It has been showing at film festivals since last year, and is now starting limited runs in some cities. Luckily, the film is planned for DVD and video release in the second half of 2002.
The filmed part of the movie ends on a positive note, first with LinuxWorld in 1999 coinciding with the Red Hat IPO (featuring Rob Malda commenting on what the unevenly divided influx of money will mean to the Linux community), and then the VA Linux IPO in December 1999, where the stock rose 698% the first day, a record. Check out the NASDAQ stock ticker crawling by on the CNBC footage from that period! Of course in retrospect we know what is coming, and the movie finishes with a couple of intertitles explaining that VA Linux and Red Hat are now trading below $5 a share.
I think this leaves the average viewer a little puzzled. Did Linux peak in 1999? Now that the money that fluxed in to Linux has fluxed out again, is the community closer to its pure roots, moving away from the open source movement and back towards free software? The movie doesn't say, but you get the feeling that somewhere, Richard Stallman is smiling.
No action at all.
Yes, CBN is in this film. Same with Taco.
And there's me thinking "The Revolution OS Will Not Be Televised"....
Baz
It really is a great documentary, and can serve to show people (esp. business types) that the OS/FS community is not only diverse and innovative, but also easy to get along with and eager to help.
this is getting old and so are you
blog
I think when Microsoft executives see photos of typical open source luminaries, they might feel an urge to give them a hug and a bowl of soup, rather than worry about them taking market share from Microsoft (forgetting that Bill Gates created the same impression at age 24, negotiating the deal to license DOS to IBM). But Stallman and Raymond and Perens are not like that; they have spent decades writing software and thinking about writing software, and the intellectual heft of their arguments reflect that.
I have often wondered why Bill Gates is responsible for such bad (and occasionally good) software.
He's not a fool, certainly, and I keep wondering why he has allowed so much rubbish to creep into the windows source code. (Particularly at a kernel level where it can do so much damage.)
Has he forgotten about the basis of good code? Did he never know how in the first place? Or is there something intrinsic in the business model of microsoft that makes it become different from the open source models?
Just wondering,
Michael
There is no cryptographic solution to the problem where the intended receiver and the attacker are the same entity.
How can you have a movie about open source without making the video available for download in a non-proprietary format that includes the script in a .RTF file?
Second, it would nice to see some other features on this DVD along with the DeCSS source (hehe).
Click here or here.
I am busy using open source technologies to benefit small players in an industry that is held slave to legacy based stuff.
I try to explain what open source is to these folks every time I go to a conference and address attendees but I always feel like I fall short explaining what open source actually is. These folks like most normal non geek people can't grasp that it's free and superior!
So I think as a gift to every new client I am giving them a copy of this so they can get informed. This DVD does so much better of a better job explaining this revolution to people.
Now if they would hurry and release the damn thing so I can buy my 1,000 copies.
I suggest you buy it and use it to educate your friends. It will have the impact of "Scared straight" except it's for non OSS people.
Is it the possible video release? Nope. That's only mentioned in passing and no real info is given on it.
Is it the local screenings for this year-old movie? Nope. Slashdot isn't the local events pages of your daily newspaper.
Is it the reader review of the film? Nope. The film's a year old and has already been reviewed and reported on quite a number of times already.
So what's left exactly?
How could they have GIF's on the movie's website when one of the main stars is RMS. You think there would be a clause about that in his contract.
For what it's worth, I've seen this on the alt.binaries.multimedia NG. If you can't get to a screening, this might be an alternative.
"Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
Lasers Controlled Games!
I was fortunate enough to see the movie on Sundance. I really liked the movie although I do not expect non-geeks to enjoy it (in fact, I watched it with a bunch of non-geeks and they absolutely hated it).
I thought Stallman was portrayed in a pretty positive manner (which IMHO is good as he does alot for the community but gets a heck of a lot of criticism for his views). ESR just came off as a total prick, touting his Bazaar essay as "changing the world." Bruce Perens came off as a business man and the whole OSI thing tended to be viewed as a way to commericialize Free Software (which I do believe is true to some extent).
What really suprised me though was how Linus came off in the movie. He almost seemed indifferent and a little aggreviated with Linux. I don't know, he definitely wasn't passionate about it which kind of disappointed me.
My favorite scene that illustrated the difference between Linus and RMS was at a LinuxWorld expo keynote where both were on stage. RMS is rambling off about how important free software is, trying to rally the world, and Linus just kind of was goofing around on the stage with his little daughter, totally oblivious to anything RMS was saying.
Good movie though, I will definitely buy it when it comes out on video.
int func(int a);
func((b += 3, b));
Never in my life have I thought that this page would someday exist.
Now it's all about waiting for the nomination from the academy.
Linus, sure.
Stallman, eh..
Taco? damn..
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The Oracle of Bacon says that Linus Torvalds has a bacon number of 3. Not bad.
Ergonomica Auctorita Illico!
I was able to see this thing on Sundance. It was rather dry and dated info. Currently GPL and GNU has taken a different form that what these people had originally intended and become more legalesse than necessary.
The movie was made around the tech boom and days that VALinux was worth the price of a PC per share. Although Stallman was true to form an Open source advocate, you could see others in the film (Bruce Perens, Michael Tiemann, Eric Raymond,...) get that greedy glimmer that Gates always has in their eyes.
It also ends slightly before the bust and if compared to current day their comments seem naive.
I read the screenings page on the website and there was no mention of further east coast exposure, and I missed the Savannah GA screening.
Anyone know if we can see it here in Atlanta or if it will go to video some time?
~ now you know
There's a philosophical reason for drag-and-drop problems between Gnome and KDE? For those of us who don't live in SoCal, could you tell us what it is?
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
Revolution OS has been playing for over a month, on and off on the Sundance Channel. Set your TiVo tonight, and you'll be set!
Sundance channel showed this a few times (thank god for Tivo).
I thought that it was okay overall, but that it suffered a bit from the "preaching to the choir" syndrome. The best example: when they read Bill Gates' "Open Letter to Hobbyists" and they have the reader read increasingly fast and in a high pitched voice.
Open Source has good enough answers to the issues raised in the "Open Letter to Hobbyists" that it really wasn't necessary to "fix the fight" by making Bill Gates sound like a hyperactive chipmunk.
Eric Raymond's "I'm your worst nightmare" anecdote about encountering Bill Mundie in the elevator also hit a sour note. I've heard Eric speak, and he is a very thoughtful speaker. But the way this anecdote was presented out of context made him sound pretty childish. Fortunately, he gets some good air time later in the movie.
** The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not reflect those of my employers - past, present, or future**
Two geeks create a community-based discussion website that turns into a militant geek site monster that goes out of control. The geeks try to take back control with underhanded moderation and editorial tactics. The movie ends with the site being drowned out with advertisements and the geeks fired from their own company.
Don't forget about THGSB !
Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
You should've gone solo--it's a good film. I went the night before ALG's field trip and the theater was about 75% full. Not bad for a Wednesday night. One of the interesting things I noticed while I was there were the three or four guys who showed up in official Microsoft denim shirts. On the way into the theater there was a table covered with photocopied documents, flyers for Linux support companies and free Redmond Linux CDs, but on the way out there was a stack of official Microsoft .Net promo CDs next to all the Linux stuff. I wonder where that .Net stuff came from...
Huh? That was in there, sure, but I definitely would not call it the core of the movie.
To me, it was about explaining how Linux came to be, what makes it different from proprietary software, and why the people that build it are willing to 'give away' their code.
And it does that fairly well, I think. For most of us, it's nothing we didn't already know, but I think it can go a long way to educating non-geeks about what's different and why we care.
The only problem I had with it was that it ended with the hi-tech market collapse and kind of implied that that was somehow the end of Linux. Those same non-geeks who would be informed by the first 90% of the movie could be seriously mislead by the last 10%.
I thought they were talking about some Chinese GNU/Linux distro for like the first half of the article...
sic transit gloria mundi
CmdrTaco sitting on an inflated couch?
"And like that
What a bloated, shamelessly self-interested plug. No one outside of Linux-weenies and unwilling video archivists are going to see this film. Why? Because it's not interesting to anybody but the most devouted "me too" open-source enthusiast.
There must be some confusion (or delusion) about Linux and open-source these days: nobody outside of the "movement" is interested in Stallman (outside of his writing) or Torvalds (outside of his kernel work) or anyone else for that matter.
Why? Because it's bloody software we're talking about here! And although, granted, the philosophy behind the propogation of this software can be interesting, it's clearly not something anyone who isn't part of a LUG is going to be remotely interested in.
When Linux actually gains a reasonable hold of the desktop...when average citizens really take an interest in it (outside of civilian hobbyists), then you can make all the back-patting, iconoclastic documentaries you want.
Man, and I thought Jon Katz was a drip...
This wasn't just plain terrible, this was fancy terrible. This was terrible with raisins in it. - Dorothy Parker
Two geeks create a community-based discussion website that turns into a militant geek site monster that goes out of control.
:-P
Yes, yes, a monster that feeds on massive bandwidth, huge servers and is able to use a death ray to obliterate other websites!! I like it!
The geeks try to take back control with underhanded moderation and editorial tactics.
So it's like "Pirates of Silicon Valley", too? With a Godzilla like monster? Where are you going with this?
The movie ends with the site being drowned out with advertisements and the geeks fired from their own company
...and a troll known as Goody modded down to -1
Don't forget about THGSB !
Hunh? THGSB? This Has Gone South, Buddy? You got me with that one...
You're a lousy script writer, director and producer, bub. Two big thumbs way down.
Soko
"Depression is merely anger without enthusiasm." - Anonymous
This is a really funny synopsis...
Revolution OS is an historical document about the free software movement, which renamed itself open software and was able to raise a lot of money from investors who believed there was a difference. The main beneficiary, VA Linux Inc, had a spectacular IPO (its stock jumped from 30 to 250 on opening day and its CEO exclaims that he can't believe this is happening. It didn't really. As the closing credits start to roll, we find that the stock subsequently dropped to 2 and that VA Linux (now VA Software) has quit the Linux business. It would have been interesting to have watched their slide down, but the film makers apparently ran out of money too.
Do not taunt Happy Fun Ball(TM)
Also it was intersting to hear the interviews with RMS, BP, and ESR as well as Linus Torvalds.
It was also interesting that they were working on a kernel of their own, I guess the Hurd in about 1985, when Linus released his first kernel in 1991 or so. I may be off by a few years in the dates, it was a movie after all.
They even mentioned why their kernel took so long. They mentioned some of the issues with the microkernel and message passing. Also how the message passing was hard to manage.
For anyone who is interesed in Linux, BSD or open source of any kind, it is a good documentary.
Only 'flamers' flame!
- adam
P.S. As in, using "Linux" to refer to an entire GNU/Linux distribution.
At least it isn't Revolution X,
I never played a worse shooter, and the musical tie ins were laughable at best...
Speaking of musical tie-ins...
At least it is not "Dance, Dance Revolution OS". It would be scary^H^H^H^H^H cool to see Taco on said inflatable couch dancing to a few rave tunes.
ASCII tastes bad dude.
Binary it is then.
"Neutrality is right" is a choice, and merely accentuates the belief in a dichotomy you seem to rant against. What I think you meant to say is "There is no spoon".
perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
So I think as a gift to every new client I am giving them a copy of this so they can get informed. This DVD does so much better of a better job explaining this revolution to people.
So we're not boycotting DVDs today? Damn, must have missed that memo.
Its just software. Its just computers. Its just a world-spanning network available to an unprecidented number of individuals.
And the printing press was just a machine.
To some people, a tool is just a tool. Even those in the business of making tools sometimes see them as simple end products. Something generated to, in turn, generate income.
Others realize the impact these tools can have on a society. They recognize that a tool becomes a vehicle of change. And because of that change, the tool in turn wields a greater degree of power, and requires a higher degree of respect than just an object that generates cash flow.
Open Source and Free Software may be about technology. But they are also about the social aspects of that technology.
And before one dismisses this as some political ideology, that social aspect also affects business. How much of your corporate infrastructure is dependant on a single vendor and their marketing strategy?
Are the leaders of these movements obscure to the general public? Sure. But that does not mean the movement, and the ideas of these leaders, are not worthy of documentation. And it certainly doesn't mean the movements themselves have no value outside of hobbiests and the enthusiast.
So why are you here? No interest, move on. Didn't you mom teach you, "If you don't have something good to say, don't say anything."?
Most of us are here because we do care. Stallman and friends care a great deal for our rights. As Thomas Jefferson noted, most honest people are too concerned with the details of their daily lives to be consider larger issues. Every now and then you find someone like RMS willing to quit their job for principles. Occasionally, they suceed. Free software and the four software freedoms will touch everyone just as the Bill of Rights did. Certianly, more of us can name more of both documents than your "average citizen".
It is sad to see that the story is not well told, but it is good that it was captured at all. This is typical of history. Change, especially of ideas, is often slow even inperceptible. When the revolution is over people look around and wonder how anyone could have thought differently. Here, in this film, we have the movers themselves, their words and expressions captured. That's nice for someone like me who will never get a chance to see any of them personally. Linux and other free software will dominate the desktop. People will wonder how anyone ever put up with computers that worked so poorly, cost so much and continuously forced people to redo their work. Licenses that forced the usage of certian software and prohibited critcism under penalty of revocation will bring blank stares. The average citizens will eventually chose or be given free software because it works better. Already, they know things are not as they should be. When the answer is put before them it will be clear, as it was for all of us. They will then be interested in who had such great ideas to begin with. Someone will be able to take this and stick key pieces into a larger documentary that includes insanity like the DCMA, Disney, M$ and Hollings.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
You're pretty dead-on with that remark...unfortunately, it looks like CmdrTaco modded you down a half dozen times for not liking his screen debut. But never fear...for this is Slashdot, where no story gets posted just once!! Wait until tomorrow, when CmdrTaco will jump in with his (-1 redundant) two cents, and starts quoting tag lines from all the top reviewers! Here's a little preview:
"Eric S Raymond is this year's hottest new star!"
-David Manning, The Ridgefield Press
"Open Source has never sizzled like this!
-Terrance McNeily, Fluff Movie Magazine
"What do you get when you pack 3 dirty HIPPIES and 7 pale, pimply-faced gaywads into a VA-Software sponsored DOCUMENTARY? A slam-bang WINNER! Revolution OS FSCKING ROX!
-Harry Knowles, Ain't It Cool News
Rob Malda makes Corey Feldman look like...well...a much more attractive Corey Feldman!
-Roger Ebert, The Chicago Sun-Times
I'm glad this movie will be screened in Newport Beach! There is no greater concentration of semi-powerful corporate drones anywhere in the world, who really need this kind of education. These people are smart, and appreciative of the kind of advantages Linux offers, but too caught up in the mess to see the light. This will help, even if it's just a little.
Ya know, there is a perfectly good model, that does not require a huge fscking 'environment' that is easily implementable in EVERY X program. There is also a very cool other protocol, XDS, that allows you to drag files FROM an application to your filesystem. NEITHER of these require the bloat that is KDE and Gnome (more KDE than gnome).
WTF don't these environments just use THAT elegant standard?!?
Actually, after reading "Just For Fun", I came to the realization that it could be morphed into the sequel to "Pirates Of Silicon Valley." The meeting between Linus and Steve Jobs clinched it.
Question: who would play Linus? All I know is that if Noah Wylie, Anthony Michael Hall and the actors who portrayed Steve Wozniak and Steve Ballmer aren't involved, it would suck.
A better screenplay would help, too. There was way too much time spent on Steve Jobs and his various and sundry dramas that the real story got lost a little.
It's still a fsckn classic, though.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
I started as a complete newbie to linux 2 years ago. I asked a lot of questions on websites and after a couple of months on irc when I found irc.openprojects.net.
My questions were almost always answered not only promptly but politely. In 2 years of asking questions I've only heard RTFM once as a response. (and not only was it warranted, it was the best response I could have recieved in the situation)
On irc, I've dropped by large and small project channels and talked directly to the developers who on every occasion helped me out. I have to say some were more polite and helpful than others. The kde team was much more friendly and helpful than the gnome team. That was in fact what originally started my kde use. (now i'm just a junkie)
To name a few projects where I've talked to developers/advanced users within seconds of asking a question and recieved the best help possible:
I can't even begin to compare how much better I like getting support from the free/open community than from companies.
The wealth of support out there is imense from websites and mailing lists to irc. I'd even go as far as saying it's so great, there should be a linuxdoc.org how-to to teach newbies about all the different ways they can get support and the proper etiquete to use.
Liberty.