Slashdot Mirror


The Age of Aggressive Linux Advocacy Is Upon Us?

GonzoJohn writes "Jamie Harrison, founder of GBLUG in Glen Burnie, Maryland, has written an exclusive editorial for Linux Orbit about how he sees the state of Linux advocacy. "Whether we want to admit it or not, Linux has entered a critical period in its development - a period that may, in fact, determine in fate forever. Now that Linux is no longer a strange little niche Operating System, and has developed to the point where Microsoft actually feels threatened by its proliferation, the folks in Redmond are doing everything they can in the way of software design, legislation, regulation and control of the internet to snuff Linux out. The main reason that they have failed up to this point is that Linux has matured and grown in popularity, gaining public and private defenders in the consumer market and especially the corporate boardroom." Read the editorial here" I don't think that I agree with all the points here - but it's an informative read if nothing else.

170 of 450 comments (clear)

  1. Now we've got to be careful... by darylp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For all Linux's technical superiority to Windows, we as a community must not be seen as childishly attacking Microsoft. (A trivial example being spelling their name with a '$')

    Most non-technical people perceive a community by their loudest members. If all the 'Linux' community can offer is "Mickey$oft SUXXX!" and "You're too stupid to write your own device drivers, you don't deserve a computer!" then Linux shall forever remain a niche Operating System.

    1. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by Eversor · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well I actually do prefer to spell Micro$oft with a $ because the name "Microsoft" is trademarked, and I do not have permission to use it in this comment. So instead of interfering with their pissing grounds, I prefer to make an underlying statement when I address them.

    2. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by FortKnox · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I agree, and as I've mentioned OVER and OVER again, be polite and handhold those that wish to try it.

      If you can't handle it, or have sudden urges to spout "RTFM!", then walk away and let someone who can be polite take over.

      "Aggressive" can be misunderstood in this article title. Hemos doesn't mean to be "rudely aggressive", but to market the idea of Linux more often, but still politely.

      --
      Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    3. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by onion2k · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I rather wish anyone who 'advocates Linux' never makes much of an impact in a corporate boardroom. Likewise, any MSFT 'advocate' who does the same should be equally ignored.

      Whatever your view of each operating system, the end marker is that they are tools. And when you're selecting the right one you need to be independent, you need to consider all the alternatives, and most of all you need to be unbiased.

      Its one thing to like Linux, its quite another to expect everyone else to. If Linux is the best OS for the job, go with it. If its not, don't. Choosing Linux just because you're been told its the best by some RMS wannabe might well be a very bad business decision.

    4. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by 3ryon · · Score: 5, Funny
      Well I actually do prefer to spell Micro$oft with a $ because the name "Microsoft" is trademarked, and I do not have permission to use it in this comment. So instead of interfering with their pissing grounds, I prefer to make an underlying statement when I address them.

      Do you also type $alvation Army?

    5. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by chrisseaton · · Score: 2, Informative

      You do have permission to use "Microsoft", as this is fair comment.

    6. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by catfood · · Score: 2

      But that's not what the article's about. "Aggressive" might have been a bad word. "Visible" would have been better. And there was not a thing in the article that was about attacking Microsoft, childishly or otherwise.

    7. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by flacco · · Score: 4, Funny
      Choosing Linux just because you're been told its the best by some RMS wannabe might well be a very bad business decision.

      I'll eagerly follow that divine, demented hippie into the very bowels of hell!

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
    8. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by hagardtroll · · Score: 2

      What a bunch of self important twirps you guys are. Come on. No one gives a p00p about what OS some pimple-headed geek with no social skills uses to download pr0n in his parents basement.

      The reality is NO ONE CARES!

      I sent one of those EFF faxes to my congressman (Charlie Bass) and I got a form letter explaining to me how the DMCA is the best piece of legislation ever passed to protect my being able to get enterainment over the internet and they hope to get pass more legislation to keep the web safe from terrorists and the like.

      If he had actually read the fax I sent, I would have probably just been placed into a category of electronic trouble makers like those cr|hackers that they see in the movies.

      We don't matter.

    9. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by ReelOddeeo · · Score: 2

      Whatever your view of each operating system, the end marker is that they are tools. And when you're selecting the right one you need to be independent, you need to consider all the alternatives, and most of all you need to be unbiased.

      They are tools. Like most tools in most professions, sometimes people have preferences and recommendations. People in other professions share information both good and bad about their tools. This exchange does play into the tool selection process along with other factors. The reputation of a tool among professionals is a legitimate factor to consider along with other factors in making a decision.

      Choosing Linux just because you're been told its the best by some RMS wannabe might well be a very bad business decision.

      Choosing Photoshop because you've been told it is the best by other graphic artists (or wannabes) might well be a very bad business decision.

      Choosing Craftsman (or insert other brand here) wrenches because you've been told they are the best...

      Choosing Hoover (or other brand) vaccum cleaners because you've been told they are the best....

      --

      Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
    10. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by sheldon · · Score: 2

      For all Linux's technical superiority to Windows, we as a community must not be seen as childishly attacking Microsoft.

      Maybe you could provide some more detail to this technical superiority claim?

      Instead most advocacy seems to center around completely emotional reasons, thus the use of the $ sign as some sort of "Fight the man!" argument. When people don't have good sound logical arguments to support their claims, they typically resort to such childishness.

    11. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by Tranvisor · · Score: 2

      No, because the SA doesn't sue people for talking about them, or make it a condition not to trash them if I buy some cloths.

    12. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by bonius_rex · · Score: 2
      Uh.
      How do you spell Linux?

      Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.
      (http://www.redhat.com/legal/legal_statement.html)

    13. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      No it's better to call them communists and un-american.

      The only people who object to M$ are M$ trolls. I have never heard anybody else conplain.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    14. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by Malcontent · · Score: 2

      Choosing Windows because you've been told by some Ballmer wannabe might well be very bad decision too.

      --

      War is necrophilia.

    15. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by Unknown+Lamer · · Score: 2

      Choosing Linux just because you're been told its the best by some RMS wannabe might well be a very bad business decision.

      I met this guy last week at the last calug meeting and can tell you this: he is no RMS. If he were like RMS, he would use GNU/Linux and advocate Free Software. No, instead he is more like ESR; he advocates Open Source and doesn't care one bit about the Freedom that Free Software gives you. He's also been using GNU/Linux since December...so you are right about any corporation listening to him making a bad choice (come on, would you trust someone who has been using GNU/Linux for eight months? Hell, I wouldn't even trust me, who has been using it for three years). I'm not saying he doesn't have a few good points, I just think that he needs the help of more experienced people if he wants anyone to listen to him (and really, someone needs to emphasize the Freedom that GNU/Linux gives you).

      --

      HAL 7000, fewer features than the HAL 9000, but just as homicidal!
    16. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by 4of12 · · Score: 2

      For all Linux's technical superiority to Windows, we as a community must not be seen as childishly attacking Microsoft.

      Well, if I were a Microsoft advocate (i.e., one of those with a significant number of shares of MSFT - everyone else just tolerates their existence like they do death and taxes), then I'd look at every possible way of hindering the Linux rate of adoption.

      One way would be good to discourage the uptake of Linux: pose as Linux zealot, scream at newbies to RTFM on the relay channels and use plenty of name-calling and profanity in my postings to newsgroups and web forums, attempt to alienate potential users of Linux by loudly trumpeting my inherent superiority to those lusers out there.

      For every twenty people that advocate Linux intelligently "It's cheap, rock solid and works like a champ." on a word of mouth basis, one person yelling like a fool can sour just as many.

      The only saving part in all this is that Microsoft advocates (Steve Ballmer) have less and less credibility as they issue statements to their potential customer base who actually use Microsoft products everyday and know exactly what they're getting for their money. Few Linux advocates actually get any signicant amount of money by taking their positions; the same can't be said of the most visible and vocal of the Microsoft advocates.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    17. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by EvilAlien · · Score: 2
      An RMS wannabe doesn't advocate Linux,they advocate GNU/Linux.

      Just thought I'd toss that petty useless nitpick in since the majority of comments on this story have been useless and nitpicky.

      --
      perl -e 'print $i=pack(c5, (41*2), sqrt(7056), (unpack(c,H)-2), oct(115), 10)'
    18. Re:Now we've got to be careful... by radish · · Score: 2


      Sure, so you run L1nux do you? Remember that's trademarked too...not forgetting $u$E and of course R3dHat.

      --

      ---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"

  2. This is new? by rde · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Now, if you'd said that the age of polite linux advocacy was upon us, I'd have been interested.

    On a more serious note: what's this crap about Linux dying? Linux can't die until the last developer croaks. That's unlikely to happen. Linux may lose corporate support (unlikely, but not impossible), but that's a long way from Linux's death.

    1. Re:This is new? by NexusTw1n · · Score: 2, Informative
      I don't think even M$ believes that Linux will lose corporate support.

      "Windows is a lot more expensive to run than Linux, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer has finally confessed. Despite Redmond's heroic efforts to defeat common knowledge with elaborately-rigged total cost of ownership 'studies', innuendo, FUD and outright distortions, the rhetorical power of common experience has become too powerful, even for a marketing behemoth like MS. "
      Ballmer faces reality

      --
      It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. --Albert Einstein
  3. The Age of Aggressive Microsoft Bashing is Upon Us by Pave+Low · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I feel the feeling exact opposite is happening. Slashdot, as well as the other Linux sites are constantly bombarding us with news of Microsoft's dastardly deeds.

    I think it's been getting worse lately, witness any of Michael's screeds against MS, and then the me-too comments, and you get the feeling there's less Linux advocacy and more and more Microsoft bashing, whether it's deserved or not.

    The idea that Microsoft is paranoid and fearing Linux might be true, but is totally overblown. Microsoft fears any competition, the most likely competitor is Apple more than Linux.

    So maybe it's time the Linux advocates look in the mirror first and see what kind of advocate they'd like to be.

    --
    SIG:Slashdot: indymedia for nerds.
  4. Manifest Destiny-sounding fluff by Marasmus · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I seemed to feel a tone of 'manifest destiny' in the article. Is it just me who believes that philosophy is completely irrelevant to Linux?

    We don't NEED to gain market share. We don't NEED to singlehandedly supplant Windows in order to be successful. In fact, if Linux does supplant Windows, it's just going to become the next widely-hated major OS of the time, until someone else comes along and supplants Linux. Doesn't sound like fun to me.

    What goals does the Linux community have, other than supplanting Windows? Hrm.... creating an autonymously stable and useful operating system. Showing the Windows world what it's like to build an OS that interoperates with the majority of standards out there. Tons of others.... Why do we feel this conquistador-like goal to take over the OS world? It seems bullish and idiotic to me. There are much better things we can accomplish, cooperatively, when we're not wasting our time trying to dominate. If we keep this up for too long, Linux really will be the next Windows, in all the worst ways.

    --
    .... um, i lost you after "0110100001101001".
    1. Re:Manifest Destiny-sounding fluff by Ubi_UK · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not entirely true

      By increasing market sharing, hardware producers will start producing device drivers for new products, one of the thing linux is definately lagging behind apple or MS. I would also expect an increase in commercial software for linux (Macromedia software is the main reason FOR ME not to use linux on my desktop)

    2. Re:Manifest Destiny-sounding fluff by SimplyCosmic · · Score: 2

      There have been several quotes from Linus that come basically say that he hopes Linux doesn't compete with Windows, but with itself.

      And although the shallow side of me secretly pines for those small Linux victories over Redmond, Washington's monster, I very much realise that you are correct in that Linux doesn't have to "beat" Windows to be a success.

      Really, our only concern with Microsoft should be when they're actively trying to make it difficult for Linux to grow through manipulation of the industry.

      Otherwise, they can go off an plug Windows all they want to grandmothers and other computer users, as Linux and the other alternative OSs will continue to serve their purpose regardless.

      "Aggressive Advocacy" actually annoys me, whether it be those people who insist on typing 'micro$oft' or people who take any and every opportunity to make the rest of us look like fools with their 'L1nux R00lz! W1ndows sUx0rs 4 evar!' rants.

    3. Re:Manifest Destiny-sounding fluff by Ubi_UK · · Score: 2

      "average users" who will cry for binary drivers because compiling themselves is so hard.

      See, you're not helping anyone by 1337 ing linux like that. Hell, in most cases compilations *do* go wrong and I'll have to fiddle with documentation and configs to get it to work. The thing is not that I cannpt do it, I just don't WANT to spend hours to get my modem running. I don't WANT to know how my video codec's API works. I don't even want to know what a compiler is. I just want to buy a new video card, jam in the install CD and get it running within 5 minutes. Sure, It'll take a reboot with windows, but that is still a lot quicker that reading through all the docs so you can compile your own drivers.

    4. Re:Manifest Destiny-sounding fluff by telbij · · Score: 2

      I think we DO want to gain marketshare, for all the great reasons that have been outlined in the other responses. But I share your sentiment that the article was overdramatic.

      Linux will not die, in fact, in a business world that is constantly evolving, open-source software is uniquely positioned to roll with the waves. Companies, Conglomerates, and even whole Industries have always resisted change insomuch as it threatens their bottom line. Inevitably the world changes, and open-source software is free to flow with the change rather than fight it.

      Aside from certain doomsday scenarios for Linux involving even greater corporate controls and the proliferation of locked hardware (which I think is somewhat unlikely), I don't see any real tangible threats headed this way.

    5. Re:Manifest Destiny-sounding fluff by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2
      The idea that Microsoft is paranoid and fearing Linux might be true, but is totally overblown. Microsoft fears any competition, the most likely competitor is Apple more than Linux.

      I don't think this is right. Windows is hated not because it's dominant per se, in fact many people like it's dominance as it means easier to learn computers - what people hate is the feeling that they have no choice, that they MUST put up with the general poorness of Windows/Office. That wouldn't apply with Linux. Look how many distros there are already, and how different they are.

      What goals does the Linux community have, other than supplanting Windows?

      Well, my goal is to ensure the dominance of open platforms. Too much damage is done by closed platforms, and as I am going to spend most of the rest of my life in the computer industry, I want to ensure we have a stable foundation to go from.

    6. Re:Manifest Destiny-sounding fluff by sacrilicious · · Score: 2
      We don't NEED to gain market share. We don't NEED to singlehandedly supplant Windows

      True, but I and many others will breathe easier when increased mindshare and wider-spread corporate adoptance have made it unquestionably the case that Microsoft FUD, monopoly power, and congressional payoffs are guaranteed to fail in their quest to kill Linux. Right now they stand a scary chance of succeeding. We need that to change, and that is a worthy goal.

      .

      --
      - First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then ???, then profit.
  5. we all need to get our hands dirty by Ubi_UK · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Be active in the Linux community!

    Sure. I'd like to contribute to linux by answering newbie questions (even though 90% of these can be found by a google search or the first 5 lines of the man page)

    However what annoys me most is some GUI features of linux. I'd really like to help improving that. Now the problem is that I doen't speak C++, and I don't want to spend years learning it.
    I would be able to make a drawing about possible improvements, but I do have the feeling that peaople that are not 31337 just won't be taken seriously by true coders.
    So: Would there be a way for non-coders to make a contribution to GNU software?

    1. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      So: Would there be a way for non-coders to make a contribution to GNU software?

      Yes. Documentation, testing, suggestions. Can you write some funky HTML? The project might need someone to look after the website. Can you draw icons, logos etc? The project might need some help with some eye-candy.

      If you're not sure what you can do to help, ASK!

    2. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by el_chicano · · Score: 2
      So: Would there be a way for non-coders to make a contribution to GNU software?
      You can always write BETTER documentation. Linux has a lot of documentation but unfortunately much of it is not well written.

      Most coders will crank out mass quantities of code, but are not very good at documentation because it requires a different skillset. That's why companies hire technical writers.

      Besides, specialization makes sense in this case. Companies WANT their coders to spend time programming and their writers to spend their time documenting the project/process.
      --
      A man who wants nothing is invincible
    3. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by Ubi_UK · · Score: 2

      how do I find out which projects could use my skills? Would it be usefull for e.g. sourceforge to have somthing like an "employment agency" in which projects can advertise themself and put ads for wanted skills?

    4. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by Anarchofascist · · Score: 3, Informative

      Would there be a way for non-coders to make a contribution to GNU software?

      GNU project has a page on How to Help the GNU Project.

      If you want to improve a piece of free software, you can help enormously by reporting bugs, improving artwork, testing bleeding-edge versions.

      The KDE project suggests "Go to apps.kde.com and Freshmeat.NET and do a search for the application you are thinking of writing or just browse the lists there. If you find in these lists something of interest to you, you might want to contact the author(s) of the code and offer your help directly."

      If you can design websites, offer to become a project's webmaster. If you can write music, find a game to contribute music to.

      In short, if you have any skill at all, you can probably find a project on freshmeat you can contribute your spare time to.

      --
      Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more, Or close the wall up with our American dead!
    5. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by AndrewHowe · · Score: 2

      (even though 90% of these can be found by a google search or the first 5 lines of the man page)
      That's all very well, if you know which feckin' man page you are supposed to be looking at. I used Unix at university ten years ago, so when I go for my biannual Linux install*, I am all like, "hmm, I remember that there was some sort of command to do that, umm it was two characters, ok 'ls /usr/bin', search search search, oh I wonder what that does, no that's not it,..." and so on.

      * It's never taken me more than a couple of weeks to get pissed off and go back to Windows...

    6. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by pete-classic · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Pete's non-programmer Free Software Contribution Micro-Howto

      So, you don't know how to program, or you only know how to program in languages that are unacceptable for Free Software (such as VB), but you want to contribute. No problem!

      1. Pick a project that you care about in some way. You will almost certainly lose interest in contributing to software that you don't use regularly.

      2. Subscribe to the mailing list. Keep up with how the project is progressing, and what things are holding it back. Lurk for a while. (If the project does not have a mailing list, contact the project lead and coordinate setting up an SF.net account and getting one going.)

      Some examples of how a non-programmer can help:
      • If you are and admin type you can help new users of the package. Helping new users is probably the number one thing a non-programmer can do for a project.
      • You could bring existing documentation up to date (see why you needed to lurk?).
      • You could convert existing docs to "better" formats.
      • You could do some other non- or semi-technical work, such as bringing a web app's HTML output into compliance with a W3C recommendation.
      4. Make your presence known. Volunteer in some concrete way. Don't say "I'd love to help" say "I have six new FAQ entries, where should I send them?"

      5. ???

      6. Profit (just kidding).

      Following these easy steps I (briefly) became the project lead of a package that was featured in this month's Sys Admin Magazine, without ever writing a single line of code.

      -Peter
    7. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by kigrwik · · Score: 2

      If it's only two characters, and really important, then it's most likely in /bin :)

      Or just do:
      ls /bin /usr/bin | grep '^..$'

      But there are some stuff in /sbin and /usr/sbin, so maybe

      find / -type d -name '*bin' -maxdepth 2 | xargs ls | grep '^..$'

      See how intuitive that was ? :)
      (though I'm sure somebody can come up with something better)

      Seriously, though, there are quite a number of GUIs that are pretty decent to shield you from the command line. I happen to like Konqueror 3, actually (most of all the split-screen). And with
      the tabs in 3.1, it's gonna rock !

      Anyway, use what you like best, that's what the fight is *really* about.

      --
      -- don't discount flying pigs until you have good air defense
    8. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by SurfsUp · · Score: 3, Insightful

      However what annoys me most is some GUI features of linux. I'd really like to help improving that. Now the problem is that I doen't speak C++, and I don't want to spend years learning it.

      Many gui-using projects have a bug database; don't be shy about entering usability bugs in the database. Your opinions do matter; you may well have more taste in interface design than many of the coders on the project, even if you aren't able to express your ideas in code. Of course, be sure you understand the issues well before posting, and state clearly what the usability bug is, not just how you think it should be fixed. I.e, "It requires 6 mouse clicks to turn off Javascript" (it really does, in Mozilla) not just "let me have an option to put a button on the toolbar to turn Javascript on and off".

      --
      Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
    9. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by pete-classic · · Score: 2

      It is unacceptable because the toolchain is not Free, and the software would be useless on a Free System.

      You could certainly distribute a VB program under Free Software terms, and it would be Free Software, but very few "Free Software people" would find this acceptable.

      -Peter

    10. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by xtremex · · Score: 2

      As VB itself is not free, the DLL's and OCX controls you are compiling w/ are not under the GPL, VB code, can not be GPL

      --
      If you're not a Liberal in your 20's, then you have no heart.If you're still a Liberal in your 30's you have no brain.
    11. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by 5KVGhost · · Score: 2
      Besides, specialization makes sense in this case. Companies WANT their coders to spend time programming and their writers to spend their time documenting the project/process.
      Well, sort of. It's really kind of hard to write good technical documentation without familiarity with the application or close communication with the developers. I think that kind of collaboration is lacking in the Linux community, and that's one of the reasons why most Linux documentation is not very good.
    12. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by AndrewHowe · · Score: 2

      Well thanks, I will be sure to try that out next time I install Linux.
      The thing is though, no-one likes to become a newbie again. I have used Windows for 10+ years and I know my way around it. I'm sure I could know my way around Linux too, but would it be better? Or just different?
      I think of it a bit like learning languages. I could learn French (well, I already know it a bit, just like I know Linux a bit). What would that do for me? Not much. I don't live in France. I don't know anyone French who doesn't also speak English. I might learn it for fun, or if I needed to use it, but generally I get on pretty well with English.
      The French would like me to speak their language because it grows mindshare, but that is something that's good for them, not for me. That's my problem with a lot of this Linux advocacy. Show me why I would benefit from using it.
      And none of this hand-waving "it's superior in almost every way" kind of bullshit. I'm not stupid. I've been using computers for three quarters of my life. I can understand technical arguments so don't spare me the details.

    13. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by pete-classic · · Score: 2

      That is not my opinion at all.

      Two of my favorite Free utilities are Simon Tatham's putty and pscp. Both are Windows only, and can be built with non-Free tools, but can also be built with Free tools.

      I'm not even monomaniacal about that. I used to use WinPT (Windows Privacy Tray) (a Free utility that makes Windows GnuPG more PGP-like) which, AFAIK, can only be built with MSVC.

      Allow me to rephrase a bit and say that Free Software that requires non-Free tools is not generally accepted. Do a bit of research on freshmeat.net or SF.net if you disagree with me. I think you'll find that the facts are on my side.

      As to the charge of elitism, I don't see how acting in a way that is in line with one's own philosophy can be elitist. If it is then I'd rather be an elitist than a hypocrite. Is a vegetarian who finds a cheese burger unacceptable for lunch being elitist?

      If you still disagree with me feel free to offer your help to some Free Software projects, but only on the condition that you can write modules in VB, and see what kind of reception you get. Again, I'm sure you can find a few examples of projects where this will fly, but for every one you find I can find 20 that find that find it unacceptable.

      -Peter

    14. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by Tablizer · · Score: 2

      (* Sure. I'd like to contribute to linux by answering newbie questions (even though 90% of these can be found by a google search or the first 5 lines of the man page) *)

      Make an AI contraption that answers the most common questions then. That pot-head winner of the Turing contest found ways to do similar things with common questions he found people asked.

      Keyword searches are not very pleasent at times. They are blind to possible synonyms, for example. A smart help system would be able to equate "slow" to "speed problems" rather than "no topics matching 'slow'".

    15. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2
      Good idea. I've been thinking that this'd be a good idea for a while actually, but it should be more general, ie programs can link to libtutorial library and have an easy way of making interactive tutorials that integrate with their software. Not just tutorials for the desktop environments, but also for the GIMP, OpenOffice etc. It'd save reinventing the wheel.

      I don't have time right now, I'm too busy working on autopackage, but is anybody else interested?

    16. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by mvdwege · · Score: 2

      Your userID seems to suggest you're in the UK, right? Try getting your hands on a copy of Linux Format.

      Not only do you get 2 CDs or 1 DVD full of the latest bleeding edge software, but they run a monthly feature with projects needing help in all areas, from coding to documentation writing, graphics design and advocacy, including instructions on how to contact the developers.

      If you're not UK based, Linux Format is also being sold in the U.S., and I can heartily recommend the magazine as one of the best.

      Mart
      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    17. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by AndrewHowe · · Score: 2

      Thankyou for your non-flammable answer.
      My Win2K doesn't crash very often. I am a game developer so I push it pretty hard, and sometimes the drivers aren't up to it. Not Microsoft's fault. I suppose that if I had the source to the drivers I could spend a week or so sorting that out. In reality I fire off an email, code a work-around, and get on with my life. Things are not really so different in Linux-land. Most people don't have the ability to debug driver problems.
      The GUI vs. shell thing is pretty much a religious issue. Some people might think it is fun to type "make run" or something but I prefer F7, Ctrl-F5. I am sure that you could set up your keyboard macros similarly. Whatever. The GUI works very well for me, and you may or may not be able to pry it from my cold, dead hands ;)
      I don't have XP yet but the product activation thing was pretty much a storm in a tea-cup. If you bought it legally, it's not gonna be a big problem.
      I first installed Slackware in '93. I was into Unix at the time. It was OK... It never really inspired me that much though. To be fair, it pretty much sucked. I have installed various distributions since then. Ooh, look at all the pretty window managers... LOL
      As a developer, I have dealt with Microsoft for a long time. In my humble opinion they are pretty darned good to their developers. Their documentation has always been good (with a few notable exceptions). Now as an Xbox developer I can honestly say that I have never had as much pleasure working on a console. The libraries are good, the samples are good, the tools are second to none. My Xboxes are represented as shell namespaces. How freaking cool is that? I just copy files to an Explorer window. I can run the kernel debugger when things get hairy. You might not be able to relate to what I am saying but... I am just trying to tell you my perspective on things.
      As for Win9x. Let me tell you, I was at a "Chicago" developer conference in 95 (or was it 94?). It was so geeky. There was a woman (can't remember her name, but she was one of the hardcore developers) going into some serious detail about the Win16 Lock. Oh dear. What happened was, they took the 16 bit Windows 3.1, and added a load of 32 bit stuff to it. Only, the 16 bit stuff was non-re-entrant. They had some choices. The major two were: (A) Go through the whole source tree and make sure that specific resources were not used at the same time; (B) Just stick a bluddy great lock on any usage of the 16 bit subsystem. Guess what they did. Yes, and that is why Win9x sucks. To be fair, Microsoft never really intended Win9x to last for as long as it did. Cairo was supposed to come along and unify everything. Of course this did not happen until errrm.... Win2K or perhaps WinXP. But anyway. Anyone advocating Windows gave up on the Win9x line a very long time ago. It just wasn't advocatable! NT, on the other hand, is actually quite good, being as it is completely unrelated to the suckage that is Win9x!
      Anyway, I am about due another Linux install. Wish me luck!

    18. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by pete-classic · · Score: 2

      I guess our difference of opinion revolves around the cause of a minuscule portion of Free Software being written using non-free tools.

      I think that it is because most Free Software folks find such tools unacceptable.

      It seems that you think that this is some sort of coincidence.

      -Peter

    19. Re:we all need to get our hands dirty by el_chicano · · Score: 2
      I think that kind of collaboration is lacking in the Linux community, and that's one of the reasons why most Linux documentation is not very good.
      That is very true. You know what would help get everyone together? FREE BEER! :->
      --
      A man who wants nothing is invincible
  6. No, the age of IMPROVED USER INTERFACE by mekkab · · Score: 2

    This needs to be a two front war.
    The first front is the aggressive advocacy. However with increased spotlight (both good and bad) comes increased scrutiny.

    There are many tasks that linux can handle with aplomb. And for those things that it doesn't, we need to get working on it.

    And yes I mean we. So how can *I* help?

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  7. big shock by tps12 · · Score: 2, Troll

    This is what some of us have been saying for years.

    The single biggest threat to the success of Linux is the Linux zealot who reads Slashdot, thinks UserFriendly is funny, talks about Monty Python incessently, and recompiles his kernel daily. Windows has its geeks, too, but it also has a ton of normal people who get some fresh air once in a while and enjoy the company of other humans.

    Slashdot should be working to counteract this, not by trying to become still more geeky and elitist, but by trying to attract a more middle-of-the-road audience. How about a Sports section, or a columnist who deals with issues that everyone cares about, like taxes?

    --

    Karma: Good (despite my invention of the Karma: sig)
    1. Re:big shock by Salsaman · · Score: 2
      You make it sound like the two things are incompatible. Personally, I read Slashdot, UserFriendly makes me laugh when I read it, I do have a fondness for Monty Python and I'll occasionally compile a Linux kernel. However I also go out a lot and I enjoy social situations.

      How about a Sports section, or a columnist who deals with issues that everyone cares about, like taxes?

      This is Slashdot, News for Nerds. If you want to discuss sports or taxes, why not read kuro5hin or any of the multitude of other sites out there that do cover topics like those ?

    2. Re:big shock by JPelorat · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Your attitude is just as elitist and arrogant as those to which you claim to be superior.

      You want news and weather and bite-sized breakfast chit-chat material? Try yahoo.com. Or msnbc.com. The cool thing about having more than one website available on the Internet is that you can open them in separate browser windows, and (here's the neat part) read multiple sites at the same time.

      Do you always insult people for their personal preferences, likes, dislikes, and habits, and at the same time expect them to agree with you and do what you want? Reality doesn't actually work that way, but I suppose you'll find that out soon enough.

      --
      Hokey statistics and ancient misconceptions are no match for a good thought in your head, kid!
  8. The real reason Linux is gaining popularity by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Linux is still inferior to Windows in functionality and ease of use. It's popularity is growing only because of Microsoft's continuing (and getting worse) bullying behavior and increasing onerous licensing practices.

    1. Re:The real reason Linux is gaining popularity by spitzak · · Score: 2
      I believe Linux is popular because it matches the Unix standards that most computer users were accustomed to. Many older-school programmers are pissed off at MicroSoft in effect reverting interfaces to stuff designed before 1970 and changing the names of many concepts for no good reason. Linux was initially seen as a way to bring some sense to the computer, not as a great social revolution of open source.

      MicroSoft blew it. They should not have hired Dave Cutler with his rabid hatred of Unix (he hates it because it killed his beloved child, VMS). If "Windows NT" had been a Unix clone when it started appearing in 1989, I don't think there would be any Linux or FreeBSD today, and MicroSoft software would run every single computing device on earth. PS: I don't mean that it ran X, I mean that the system should have provided symbolic links, binary-only files, no limits on characters in file names, and Unix process controls. MicroSoft could easily have added their own proprietary window system and if it fit the Unix process model it would have succeeded easily.

      People ignore it now and concentrate on the "evil" of MicroSoft, but they have to realize that the reason there was such a push for Unix clones on PCs (which would have NO graphics, NO applications, NO drivers, and just a terminal interface) was the shock and horror at the absolute crap that MicroSoft was foisting on the public, such crap that they were willing to put up with tremendous limitations and huge amounts of work just to get an interface that was pleasant to program with.

      MicroSoft has also got to realize that they screwed their image with these horrible designs, so much so that every new thing, even if it is maybe a well-designed thing (like perhaps .NET is?) is tainted with the "designed by MicroSoft" brush.

    2. Re:The real reason Linux is gaining popularity by phliar · · Score: 3, Informative
      Linux is still inferior to Windows in functionality and ease of use.
      It would be more helpful (and a better comment) if you could tell us the areas Linux is inferior to Windows.

      I can tell you that for my purposes -- development (cvs, gcc, emacs), remote administration (ssh, X11), graphics (GIMP), audio/video (MP3 players, Quicktime [with Dreamweavers Crossover], MPEG) -- it works just fine. It supports all my hardware -- a TV card, Wacom Intuos tablet, Turtle Beach soundcard, USB Canon G1 digital camera, USB IBM webcam, Yamaha CD burner, Matrox G200 video -- with no problems.

      In addition, it never crashes, handles NFS and NIS, is not vulnerable to the Bug Of The Day, and handles my web sites and mailing lists.

      Oh, and it's free.

      --
      Unlimited growth == Cancer.
    3. Re:The real reason Linux is gaining popularity by anshil · · Score: 2

      First of all I'm a linux user myself, and yes to some part a geek.

      However in private use on the home tables IMHO linux is not ready for the non geek user, it are sometimes the problems I run over and solve, however I say a non geek user could have never solved this problem.

      Like I've upgraded KDE, and libpng suddendly malfunctions, viewable only in the .xsession error logs. A non geek would never look there. All that was wrong was symlink in the /lib directory, however is a non geek ever capable of fixing this? Or installing xcdroast, xcdroast expected the cdrw tools in /usr/bin, howver the cdrw tools installed themselfs per default at /usr/local/bin, no problem for me, however a "normal" enduser? Or LD_LIBRARY_PATH beeing wrong and all such things. GNU/Linux is not ready for the end user.

      In my personal view I think a fundamental "problem" is the System V filesystem. what is good for anyways, Why doesn't each software packet have _one_ directory and everything it needs beneth it? I think administring such strucutre is far more transparent than system V.

      --

      --
      Karma 50, and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.
    4. Re:The real reason Linux is gaining popularity by anshil · · Score: 2

      I think the PATH system could be replaced with a better paradigm, what exactly has to thought of.

      After all the PATH is only for the shell to decide which executables should be visible by default.

      A global XML file listing all applications would be one possibility. However this has to extended by a way for a local running process to extend it's path, with an environment variable.

      I know this is all a crazy idea, but I think if done proparly it could dramatically ease system administration, and maybe get rid of decade old cords like the PATH variable. Is this so a good idea after all?

      --

      --
      Karma 50, and all I got was this lousy T-Shirt.
  9. Team OS/2 by pgrote · · Score: 2

    Just what we need another zealot organization. Who remembers the days when Team OS/2 would do the same things you are proposing?

    http://www.jerrypournelle.com/archives/archivesm ai l/mail52.html

    I do agree with putting your money where your mouth is, but preaching to "non-converts" when you don't have the actual goods to back it up borders on futile.

    The lady in the checkout wants to turn her PC and play a game or balance her checkbook. She doesn't want to hunt online for these things. She wants to buy them at the local store.

  10. Linux is free by AppyPappy · · Score: 2

    The reason Linux has succeeded is that it is free and Microsoft chose not to drive it out with "predatory" pricing. You can install Linux and run it without paying a dime. You can't do that with any form of Windows (legally). Once Linux got a foothold and people began simplifying it, it was too late for Gates. Now that XP has been released, Gates will see a further erosion in the Dark Side as people get fed up with the license scheme and start coming into the light.

    If it weren't for Netscape, we would be paying for IE. Same deal.

    --

    If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem

    1. Re:Linux is free by justsomebody · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actualy, first one you're right but as much as I love Linux advocacy, second one is wrong. If it weren't IE we would be paying for Netscape. Netscape had initial price that has gone down to 0 with version 3. IE was free.

      Now it's other way around. People pay for bundling IE wth Windows and as such IE price tag is included with system price. Netscape has gone further by supporting Mozilla, so his price tag has gone below zero (not by usability, price only).

      --
      Signature Pro version 1.13.2-3 release 83.5 beta3try7 after-breakfast edition
    2. Re:Linux is free by nite_warrior · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The reason Linux has succeeded is that it is free I don't think that that is the only reason, ofcourse it helps, but is not the only reason... The main strength for linux is it's robustness and the posiblility of do with it whatever you want and need, and there are always people out there willing to help you out, you can get really good tech support for linux out there on newsgroups or irc rooms, but is really hard to get good tech support for M$ products cause not even their people are good at helping. Entusiasm is our main weapon on leading the computer industry, and this doesn't apply just to linux but also to other OSS.

  11. Advocate to the right people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We have to be realistic. Even if Linux usage on the desktop increases by 400% over the next several years, it isn't going to make any real difference. Why? Because Microsoft has the high ground. They make massive financial contributions to the right people - namely the campaign funding pots of the US government.
    In 3 years time, Microsoft in conjunction with AMD and Intel are going to start setting up a hardware and internet infrastructure which Linux will not be able to run on. Want to install Linux on your new PC? Can't - the CPU won't let you because it doesn't support their properterial encryption. Want to run a DVD, a Direct X game, a TV tuner, a new 'security concious' hard drive or motherboard? Can't, for much the same reasons. Next it'll be email, then webpages, and so on.
    Anti trust laws you say? Won't work. MS has more power over the US government than the oil barons. Think about that. There is also another dimension. There is a little thing called 'war on terrorism' on right now, and having every computer in the world capible of being easily monitored, controlled, observed and disabled by US inteligence agencies, because of the next version of Window's 'security', will greatly appeal to them... don't underestimate this factor.

    If you want to stop Microsoft, extending the user numbers isn't going to help much. Microsoft can simply cut off the air supply. The only way to stop them now is to actually get politicians in power who aren't all incompetent or corrupt fatcats.

    1. Re:Advocate to the right people by a_n_d_e_r_s · · Score: 2

      Well, it Linux increase by 400 % and gets a market share of about 15% - of course it will be a large improvement from the status que.

      It means that everybody must take Linux into account for device drivers, games and other programs.

      The world would look much different then.

      --
      Just saying it like it are.
    2. Re:Advocate to the right people by Salsaman · · Score: 2
      ...having every computer in the world capible of being easily monitored, controlled, observed and disabled by US inteligence agencies...

      Yeah I am sure that will prove very popular with people who live outside the US.

  12. The Sky is Not Falling by HappyPhunBall · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I for one do not use Linux so I can be an advocate of an OS and fuel the hype machine. Once you stop reacting to MS and start ignoring them you will understand. People are going to be just that, people. They will buy / use whatever they are told repeatedly is the best, what their friends use, what they are forced to use at work, etc. Let's not forget that most people do not care about an operating system!

    So what do I do for the "cause"? I wear Linux t-shirts, I help friends who are interested in learning Linux (or any 'nix for that matter), and I go about my business with my OS of choice. Those who are interested enough to explore the world of Linux will, and many of them will stay. The ones you have to evangelize are a lost cause. You will never compete with the likes of MS for mindshare.

  13. Well that's nice.. by Enry · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ..given that some of us have been doing this exact thing for 10 years. I went and bought Caldera because it had WordPerfect for Linux. I bought Civ III for Linux from Loki. A LOT has changed since 1992, when vendors would stare blankly at you and say "Linux?". Anyone remember the fights with Diamond and ATI over releasing specs? How about the vendors that were distributing binary-only drivers until we reverse-engineered the hardware and made it work anyway? Here we are now at the point of vendors going out of their way to tell us it works with Linux, or runs Linux.

    Is Linux ready for the commercial desktop? You bet. The apps are there, the OS is solid, and net admins can easily manage large installations.

    Is it ready for the home desktop? No way. The home apps aren't there (read: games). Not everyone is or wants to be a system administrator. Look at the zillion unpatched windows boxes out there and think what would happen if they all had a [Apache|OpenSSH|ftp] vulnerability? What if the vulnerability was in something more obscure, like snmp? RedHat and Ximian (and others) have made great strides in getting there, but there's a lot of work remaining to be done.

    So go out, do the things you do, and spread the word. Write documentation, submit bug reports, fix bugs, buy software, register hardware and tell them you use Linux.

    1. Re:Well that's nice.. by ortholattice · · Score: 2
      Look at the zillion unpatched windows boxes out there and think what would happen if they all had a [Apache|OpenSSH|ftp] vulnerability? What if the vulnerability was in something more obscure, like snmp? RedHat and Ximian (and others) have made great strides in getting there, but there's a lot of work remaining to be done.

      I think the default install of major distrs need a limited, free up2date type feature that runs nightly, or at least weekly, in a cron job to check for and automatically install the major security patches. Or maybe at least tell the user there is a security update, and click OK to install. The power users can turn this off and do their own manual stuff, but Joe Average isn't going to care and rarely will patch the system manually. MS already does this by default on XP and for better or worse it's probably a good thing for the average user, security-wise. And it should happen whether or not the Linux distro is officially "registered" or just an ISO copy from a friend.

      So who will pay for it? I'm not sure, perhaps some .org thing with people around the world volunteering mirrors. I'd volunteer mine. I don't think the bandwidth requirements would be extreme - major holes aren't found that often - but if Linux ever takes off with the general public, and a major hole is found and left unpatched on millions of home systems, hacked boxes and Ramen-type worms are going to be a big problem.

  14. What to do? by eyepeepackets · · Score: 5, Interesting

    (Note: This is a repost of a post made in reply to another post under the "Is Linux Dead?" thread from a couple of weeks ago. The original post advocated more commercial-type advertising for Linux and was titled, "Advertising would help")

    Wrong. Let me explain please.

    First, please do know I'm one of the three (a rough guess) people on the planet who are deep geeks with a marketing background. Okay, that said, here's some info to graze upon.

    In the marketing world all research for the past 100 years shows that the very best -- bar none -- type of advertising is, surprise, word of mouth. Nothing has every beat it, nothing ever will beat it. People will trust the opinions of people they know first hand over any advertisement. Why do you think there are so many ads which try to establish that type of trust relationship in the minds of the ad viewer? These types of testimonial ads are among the most successful types of ads, but pale in comparison with "word of mouth" in terms of pure clout with the target audience.

    Linux is doing as good as it is (which is very good indeed) because of a number of factors: quality, cost, and -- ta da -- the number of in-the-know technical people (computer geeks) who say it's as good or better than the commercial stuff available. Word of mouth advertising by people who have the confidence of the people with whom they're talking.

    Who do you think mom or grandma or little brother/sister is going to believe, Microsoft ads or you? If they have any experience with MS product over the past ten years then they're not going to be inclined to believe anything in a MS ad -- their personal experience tells them MS marketing is geared toward getting the money out of their pocket and MS product is not very good.

    You, the techincal person in-the-know, are in a great position compared with MS. You have a product with outstanding quality, an impossible-to-beat value-to-cost ratio and an entire, world-class army of other techies who are saying the same thing you are.

    In my opinion, Gnu/Linux/OSS/Freeware advocates would do best to just keep doing what they've been doing. Don't focus on bashing MS, just make honest comparisons, be up front with newbies about the learning curve (harder to learn, easier to use) and focus on the benefits of the product when compared with the competition. You'll continue to win big!

    Frankly, if I were leading a marketing push for Linux right now, I'd say that it's time for the little guy to be "on." Not the uber hackers (who do their own stuff so well) but all Linux users: Time for them to really focus on truely helping others understand the choices available and then helping them get going down the learning curve (which has become much shallower in the past year -- Gnome/KDE/OpenOffice.org -- hero-level work folks, congrats and thanks!)

    So, if you want to help the world avoid continuus and expanding MS hell:

    1. Join your local LUG or start one.

    2. Learn how to make a simple press release and learn where to send copies for your area.

    3. Offer some free evening classes to individuals and small businesses via the press releases (donate some time -- see next item.)

    4. Make sure there are resources in your area for individuals/businesses (consultants, tutors, etc. -- if you're not seeing $$$ by now you're blind.)

    5. Always remember that you serve yourself best when you do your best to help those you are targeting. This is the essense of quality! I know it sounds odd, but it works: The more helpful you are for your audience, the more rewards you'll see for yourself.

    I coulda/shoulda/woulda been a preacher but that whole god thing really got it the way.

    --
    Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    1. Re:What to do? by DecoDragon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Eyepeepackets makes some good points. Having read this far down in the conversation, and reading Slashdot in general, it seems there is another underlying issue. It would appear that your average vocal Slashdot reader wants 1) to topple Microsoft and supplant it with... well, one would assume Linux, and 2) wants to retain an uberGeek sort of status via his/her affiliation with all things Linux and OpenSource. So, there's a conflict. Do people want Linux to take over for Windows or do they want it to remain an elite.

      It appears that a number of people need to figure out what it is they want to see happen with Linux in the future, before they can really figure out how to respond to the original editorial.

    2. Re:What to do? by SerpentMage · · Score: 2

      And here is the problem with Open Source and specifically LINUX.... There is no $$$ in Open Source because of the lack of ecosystem.

      Let me explain this point a bit.

      In a closed source environment like one built up by Microsoft and AutoDesk the objective is to suck as much out of the client without actually killing the client. So yes this is a parasitic scenario. But the scenario is not just about selling a piece of software. It is about selling a solution based on multiple peoples input. Training, Consulting, Service, etc an eco-system where money is fluid.

      And here the Microsoft and AutoDesk empire rules in sheer momentum of their third parties. People know they can make money at selling their services or whatever.

      In Open Source and specifically LINUX this is not the case. People who in Open Source tend to be two things; cheap and farily intelligent coders. Two things that keep the ecosystem small. Fairly intelligent coders tend not to hire as many consultants, contractors, buy books, etc.

      While many may say that it is good that people do not have to hire "leech" consultants or contractors. I tend to argue back that those "leech" consultants and others keep money moving and that moving money can be used to pursue activities to increase the eco-system.

      I am not saying that Open Source could never develop a rich eco-system (examples of eco-systems being setup are PERL, PHP, etc). But notice that those Open Source environments allow closed source implementations AND they are NOT specific to LINUX. If LINUX wants to succeed then there need to be many more footing the bill of developing since there is not that much financial incentive. BTW I am not referring to simple domination, I am talking about survival. PERL and PHP will survive without LINUX, but can LINUX survive without PERL and PHP?

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    3. Re:What to do? by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2

      Are you sure the two positions are mutually exclusive? I really don't think so. UNIX is wonderfully complex but the complexity is only as deep as you wish to delve. There are many users out there who only float on the top of the complexity who do just fine and are happy with their state. Likewise, there are those who love to "get dirty" by digging into the details.

      Perhaps the key here is the tolerance that results from knowing there are many levels of users, most of whom will find their comfort level and be content. Don't dis others because you know more than they do, just view the disparity as an opportunity to help/instruct/encourage, etc.

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    4. Re:What to do? by wirefarm · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Who do you think mom or grandma or little brother/sister is going to believe, Microsoft ads or you? If they have any experience with MS product over the past ten years then they're not going to be inclined to believe anything in a MS ad -- their personal experience tells them MS marketing is geared toward getting the money out of their pocket and MS product is not very good.

      I agreee with your spirit and admire your goals, but I have to disagree a bit on that point. Microsoft knows that when the software fails, the user tends to take the blame. When programmers fail, they tend to take the blame. Bad software tends to make people feel stupid - among the programmers reading this, who *hasn't* had the feeling that they are behind the curve because they haven't learned Java yet and aren't quite clear as to what dot-net exactly is or why one should care what it is?
      Microsoft knows this and has known it for a long time. (Read "Dynamics of Software Development. By Jim McCarthy. Microsoft Press, 1995. ISBN 1556158238.") McCarthy makes numerous references to this dynamic and how it plays upon one's psyche.

      By empowering developers and holding their hands through the baby steps (setting up a basic app in VC++ using wizards) MS let developers feel a bit less stupid. Probably that alone secured the future of VC++ for what, the next ten years?

      I do a bit of help desk at my job. I get people calling me and telling me that they 'broke' the network or that they 'screwed up' MS Word. They say it with the same shame that they would feel if they got their elbow stuck while putting on their sweater. They take the blame. They feel stupud. They muck around and make things worse before calling me.

      Yet I have one user who I've set up with a linux account. She's not technical by nature, yet she's competent. She answers customer email that comes in from the web site, so she tends to get 80% of the viral attachments that come to the whole company. Rather than fight the viruses for this one account, I have her log in to a server using Putty/SSH and start a VNC session and use sylpheed to check that account. Once she got the hang of that, she really likes it - I call her 'hacker chick' since she's the only other one who uses Linux in the company. She likes it. It doesn't crash, it doesn't screw up, it doesn't make her feel stupid. She doesn't have to worry, since I told her that there is no way she can screw up the server with hwr level of permissions.

      If the company mandates a Windows-only environment, (impending possibility...) I am sure she would miss it - not because it's free in any sense, but because Linux empowered her and made her more productive. (Didn't make her feel stupid.)

      That has got to be the focus - letting people *do stuff*, not issuing LARTs and RTFMs and the usual elitist things that *nix gurus tend to do. If you want to get Linux into the hands of the people, build Linux systems that work. Build systems that work better.

      Educate people on a 'want to know' basis only. Now that may sound counter-productive, but if you are like most advocates, you will drown people in philosophy and jargon. Avoid that at all costs if you want to be a true advocate - nothing will turn people off quicker. (If they want to know more, they will ask you or fire up Google, or join a LUG...)
      I have a couple of friends who are both Windows programmers. Nice guys, but they really didn't care about Linux. They share an apartment and a DSL connection and had gotten quite sick of using Winproxy, so they finally caved in and grabbed an old box to let me set up an IPCop firewall. Actually, one of them did it while I talked him through it on the phone. It works beautifully. They love it. They installed it themselves. They are both now considering dual-boot setups on their machines, since this little router distro setup worked so well. ("What else can you do with this Linux stuff?")
      Linux has made the transition in their minds from something that is "complicated" to something that "just works".

      I just got done writing a proposal for another friend's office to set up a small network - basically a apache/samba/webmin/backup server and another ipcop router. It's a very simple, reasonable setup that will require very little maintenance, yet give them the functionality of $10,000 worth of MS software and state-of-the-art hardware for $400 in used hardware and a couple of ISO downloads.
      All they will see is how easy it is to use. After a year, I doubt they would be able to find the /etc directory with both hands and a flashlight, yet I believe it will do everything they need it to do and also make them feel pretty smart about their decision.
      For me right now, *that's* advocacy.

      As you said: "I coulda/shoulda/woulda been a preacher but that whole God thing really got it the way."
      Good point. We should probably take a look at their methods - maybe rent a big tent and travel around the south having all night Linux revivals...

      Cheers,
      Jim in Tokyo

      (Go ahead, mod me 'overrated' - I no longer care...)

      --
      -- My Weblog.
    5. Re:What to do? by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2

      > And here is the problem with Open Source and specifically LINUX.... There is
      > no $$$ in Open Source because of the lack of ecosystem.

      > Let me explain this point a bit.

      > In a closed source environment like one built up by Microsoft and AutoDesk
      > the objective is to suck as much out of the client without actually killing
      > the client. So yes this is a parasitic scenario. But the scenario is not
      > just about selling a piece of software. It is about selling a solution based
      > on multiple peoples input. Training, Consulting, Service, etc an eco-system
      > where money is fluid.

      Yes, good point. This is changing quickly now with the adaptation of Linux in the workplace. We'll see many more Linux jobs. I've been watching the job market over the past two years or so and the increase in continuous and rapid.

      > And here the Microsoft and AutoDesk empire rules in sheer momentum of their
      > third parties. People know they can make money at selling their services or
      > whatever.

      > In Open Source and specifically LINUX this is not the case. People who in
      > Open Source tend to be two things; cheap and farily intelligent coders. Two
      > things that keep the ecosystem small. Fairly intelligent coders tend not to
      > hire as many consultants, contractors, buy books, etc.

      > While many may say that it is good that people do not have to hire "leech"
      > consultants or contractors. I tend to argue back that those "leech"
      > consultants and others keep money moving and that moving money can be used to
      > pursue activities to increase the eco-system.

      > I am not saying that Open Source could never develop a rich eco-system
      > (examples of eco-systems being setup are PERL, PHP, etc). But notice that
      > those Open Source environments allow closed source implementations AND they
      > are NOT specific to LINUX. If LINUX wants to succeed then there need to be
      > many more footing the bill of developing since there is not that much
      > financial incentive. BTW I am not referring to simple domination, I am
      > talking about survival. PERL and PHP will survive without LINUX, but can
      > LINUX survive without PERL and PHP?

      Well, consider _why_ a person or business buys something in the first place: They percieve that there is value (to them) in the product _and_ the cost of the product is equal to or less than the value. Linux is odd in this respect in that it doesn't cost anything (or cost very much.) This is difficult for a lot of people (especially Americans) to understand. It goes against what they've known to be the rule: Value equals money. When one tries to explain to Joe Windows user that Linux is better but doesn't cost anything, the cognitive dissonance is practically visible in his eyes as he wonders if you're pulling his leg or what.

      This leads quickly into discussion of the paradigm shift we're starting to see in capitalism as we shift from economies of scarcity to economies of surfeit. Capitalism requires economies of scarcity to function and so what happens when things are no longer scarce? We're in for a long period of bad law, bad politics and bad times until capitalism either evolves into something workable or is replaced by something will work with economies of surfeit.

      I know that seems like a big jump in topic and I apologize.

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    6. Re:What to do? by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2

      Wow, great reply, thanks! I'm honored by such a reply.

      You make a great many good points. Mind if I use your attitude as an example?

      Best wishes,

      Another Jim

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    7. Re:What to do? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2
      Nice points. However, surely you overlook the fact that awareness of Linux amongst the general public is extremely low?

      I don't think advertising would be bad per se, as long as it was done right. I think most "computer people" now know at least what Linux is, if not much about it. So what's needed (but not yet, linux isn't ready for home desktops yet) is advertising that plants the seeds of curiousity in peoples minds - that gets them asking "What is Linux?". They can then ask their local geek, who will (hopefully) expound upon them it's greatness (the excuse being, they did ask ;)

      You say you have a marketing background. So what do you think of this? Let's say we have a hypothetical campaign. Like most stuff to do with linux, it doesn't have much money, let's say we rule out TV advertising. So we need to get far more awareness for each pound, dollar, euro we spend than other campaigns.

      Linux came from the streets. It's not like other products. Therefore, we can get away with a different sort of advertising. We can play upon the "revolutionary" aspects of it. Let's say, for a month or two, in the major cities of the world some billboard space is bought up, and filled with simple posters that have a faded picture of tux, with slogans such as "Get Ready", "Join the revolution" or "Power to the People" overlayed. Perhaps one or two have the word "Linux" underneath, so people know what to ask about, what to call it.

      IBM had a neat idea - people associate "revolution from the streets" with graffiti. It doesn't have to be illegal, if you as a landlord had a spare wall lying around, wouldn't you jump at a chance to earn a bit of money from it by letting these friendly guys spray paint some words on the side? As long as they clean up afterwards.....

      The aim would be to raise lots of awareness rather than promote the product which is hard to get across in adverts anyway (distro? what's a distro?). That vague awareness could then be turned into enthusiasm by word of mouth from geeks and other happy users. It'd also get people talking - I remember in England a national newspaper (I think it was the Guardian) ran a campaign promoting "Joy". The idea was to see if you could raise awareness of something that didn't exist, just a brand. It worked amazingly well, somebody even put up a "Joy" poster in our 6th form centre. By getting people saying "What's all this Linux Get Ready stuff about?" to each other, you could raise awareness much faster than through pure word of mouth.

      Good idea? Bad idea?

    8. Re:What to do? by SerpentMage · · Score: 2
      This leads quickly into discussion of the paradigm shift we're starting to see in capitalism as we shift from economies of scarcity to economies of surfeit. Capitalism requires economies of scarcity to function and so what happens when things are no longer scarce? We're in for a long period of bad law, bad politics and bad times until capitalism either evolves into something workable or is replaced by something will work with economies of surfeit.

      Agree and disagree

      I actually do not think that we are moving from scarcity to surfeit. I think we are moving into a society where we are going back to bater. Way back when people used to bater and something that seemed interesting was driven up in value. Tulips, gold, rice, etc. All of these products had no value other than what people thought would be interesting. The value of the product was determined by the eco-system around it. In other words so long as profit was part of the equation due to a eco-system all were happy.

      And here is where a product like Linux has issues. It is not the free price, but the eco-system. Sure you may see jobs, but there are very little other pieces of the eco-system around it. That is my point. Value is determined by the eco-system that supports it. LINUX by its nature of no cost and very techie people has no eco-system that can be used to pay for a mortage. There will be a few, but that cannot be used to support an entire industry.

      Compare it to the fashion industry. The models walking down the cat walk do not actually make money for the individual companies. It is pure show and massive costs. Why do they do it? For show. The individual companies make their money by taking other designs and bringing it to the market

      Put this into the LINUX perspective. LINUX and GNU are the models walking down the catwalk. And everybody wants to be the model or the designer. But the reality is that the money is made elsewhere.

      And in the case of PERL, Larry Wall is Claudia Shiffer and O'Reilly and ActiveState the actual companies making the products for everybody

      Sure you can argue that Redhat is the product maker for everybody. But that is only a very small piece and the rest are not making money. Compare the profititability of O'Reilly and ActiveState vs the profitability of Redhat, Mandrake, etc. From there it should become pretty clear that LINUX REALLY needs to figure out how to become a profitable ecosystem.

      --

      "You can't make a race horse of a pig"
      "No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
    9. Re:What to do? by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2

      See this checklist for what constitutes a cult. While many groups may have cult-like attributes, they are not necessarily cults. My understanding is that for a group to be a true cult, they have to meet all the criteria on this list. Having just moved from Utah, I've had more than my fair share of exposure to cult thinking and behavior, ugh.

      http://www.csj.org/infoserv_cult101/checklis.htm

      I think you're right on the mark when using the term "subculture" as opposed to cult. Funny the way subcultures often become the common culture of tomorrow.

      I agree with your point that one of the reasons people start to use Linux because it's become "cool" to do so. This isn't a bad thing providing this motivation satisfies yet another of your points, "...it does the job better than what they were using."

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    10. Re:What to do? by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2

      > Nice points. However, surely you overlook the fact that awareness of Linux
      > amongst the general public is extremely low?

      No, I understand the awareness in the general populace of Linux is low. Word of mouth is slow but sure.

      > I don't think advertising would be bad per se, as long as it was done right. I > think most "computer people" now know at least what Linux is, if not much
      > about it. So what's needed (but not yet, linux isn't ready for home desktops
      > yet) is advertising that plants the seeds of curiousity in peoples minds -
      > that gets them asking "What is Linux?". They can then ask their local geek,
      > who will (hopefully) expound upon them it's greatness (the excuse being, they
      > did ask ;)

      I disagree that Linux isn't yet ready for home desktops. I do agree that planting seeds is a good thing. More on this in the marketing bit below.

      > You say you have a marketing background. So what do you think of this? Let's
      > say we have a hypothetical campaign. Like most stuff to do with linux, it
      > doesn't have much money, let's say we rule out TV advertising. So we need to
      > get far more awareness for each pound, dollar, euro we spend than other
      > campaigns.

      > Linux came from the streets. It's not like other products. Therefore, we can
      > get away with a different sort of advertising. We can play upon the
      > "revolutionary" aspects of it. Let's say, for a month or two, in the major
      > cities of the world some billboard space is bought up, and filled with simple
      > posters that have a faded picture of tux, with slogans such as "Get Ready",
      > "Join the revolution" or "Power to the People" overlayed. Perhaps one or two
      > have the word "Linux" underneath, so people know what to ask about, what to
      > call it.

      The trick to successful marketing is understanding that marketing is mostly about psychology; the psychology of groups, individuals and individuals in groups. You hear the word "target" often in marketing when marketers are talking about specific groups they wish to market a product too. There are often many multiple target groups for a product; the wider the potential appeal of the product, the more target groups you will have. Identifying the groups can be both an art and a science, but you don't necessarily have to define target groups. Read on.

      One big problem with many multiple targets is successfully marketing to some target groups without pissing off or otherwise alienating other target groups. For example, using the word "revolution" might really appeal to some groups but really turn-off other groups. The best way to deal with this problem is to make sure you don't use any terms which might piss off one of the groups. The easiest and most effective way to do this is to _not_ use any words or phrases which have negative connotations or denotations. In other words, focus on the positives of the product you're marketing and understand that any marketing you do to one group will more than likely be seen by the other groups.

      Linux, as a general purpose OS on a general purpose machine (computer) has broad appeal, or many, many multiple target groups. So, if you want to appeal to as many of these groups as possible without pissing some of them off, just focus on the positive attributes of the product. Linux has a great many positive attributes which appeal across the spectrum of potential users and groups of users, so there is plenty of material to use without having to resort to negatives (which usually work against your product -- you'll notice you don't see a lot of ads which directly beat up on the competition.)

      > IBM had a neat idea - people associate "revolution from the streets" with
      > graffiti. It doesn't have to be illegal, if you as a landlord had a spare wall > lying around, wouldn't you jump at a chance to earn a bit of money from it by
      > letting these friendly guys spray paint some words on the side? As long as
      > they clean up afterwards.....

      > The aim would be to raise lots of awareness rather than promote the product
      > which is hard to get across in adverts anyway (distro? what's a distro?). That > vague awareness could then be turned into enthusiasm by word of mouth from
      > geeks and other happy users. It'd also get people talking - I remember in
      > England a national newspaper (I think it was the Guardian) ran a campaign
      > promoting "Joy". The idea was to see if you could raise awareness of something > that didn't exist, just a brand. It worked amazingly well, somebody even put
      > up a "Joy" poster in our 6th form centre. By getting people saying "What's all > this Linux Get Ready stuff about?" to each other, you could raise awareness
      > much faster than through pure word of mouth.

      Yes, this is known as "image advertising" in the real world. Only big corporations use it because it's outrageously expensive and almost impossible to measure in terms of effectiveness. IBM may be able to afford this, but not RedHat or SuSE or Mandrake. Personally, I think most image advertising is a waste of money but then I'm not the marketing guy at IBM and he/she may have a wildly different opinion on the matter.

      The one other point I'd like to make in response is that when using the positives of Linux in marketing/advocacy, stress the potential benefits to the individual/group you're addressing. For example, compare these two statements:

      "Linux is powerful and can do all computing tasks well."

      or

      "Linux empowers you to do all your computing tasks well."

      The second will stomp the living pee out of the first in any focus group or measured marketing results comprised of any humans anywhere on this planet (and any other planet for that matter.) When you personalize the positives, people and groups of people response is much, much better.

      > Good idea? Bad idea?

      One last thought. Raising awareness can be tricky because you can effectively make the same mistakes as with marketing, that is, you can piss off some groups whilst doing the awareness raising of other groups. If you use the tips mentioned above, you can avoid pissing off some of your potential target groups.
      How best to do mass awareness raising? It may be slow, but nothing yet devised in the realm of marketing or advertising can beat word of mouth in terms of total effectiveness. So, the best bet is to loosely organize the current Linux users (already being done in the LUGs), give them some good tips on how to _and_ how not to talk to others about Linux. See my original post for more.

      Hope all this helps and thanks for the reply, you really provoked my thinking on the matter.

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    11. Re:What to do? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2
      Hmmm, okay, I hear you about the groups thing. So do you think there would be a lot of people who are switched off by the use of the word "revolution"?

      OK, so some people would say "for crying out loud, it's just an operating system", but for others they might be interested in the story behind it. Think about it - the history of Linux is a great story, and more to the point, it's a human interest story. Of course I don't think the revolution idea would be good at all for actually selling Linux, but for raising awareness I think it might do the trick. You can always tailor the marketing for specific groups of people (server admins, home desktop users etc) later.

    12. Re:What to do? by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2

      > Agree and disagree

      > I actually do not think that we are moving from scarcity to surfeit. I think
      > we are moving into a society where we are going back to bater. Way back when
      > people used to bater and something that seemed interesting was driven up in
      > value. Tulips, gold, rice, etc. All of these products had no value other
      > than what people thought would be interesting. The value of the product was
      > determined by the eco-system around it. In other words so long as profit was > part of the equation due to a eco-system all were happy.

      Remember that currencies replaced the barter system for a very good reason: It was really very inconvienient to carry around pockets full of cheese in order to trade for melons and when you did trade, you then had pockets full of melons.

      > And here is where a product like Linux has issues. It is not the free price,
      > but the eco-system. Sure you may see jobs, but there are very little other
      > pieces of the eco-system around it. That is my point. Value is determined by
      > the eco-system that supports it. LINUX by its nature of no cost and very
      > techie people has no eco-system that can be used to pay for a mortage. There
      > will be a few, but that cannot be used to support an entire industry.

      Yes, I understand your point and it seems, at least on the surface, to be a classic "chicken and the egg" problem. There is a point in system growth dynamics when a system can said to have reached critical mass, that is, the system has become self-sustaining (an ecosystem.) Linux is close to this "critical mass" state in the IT realm, but a ways away when talking about the desktop realm. But that's what we're mostly talking about here, how to get closer to critical mass state on the desktop. See another post below which talks about marketing/advocacy for more on this.

      > Compare it to the fashion industry. The models walking down the cat walk do
      > not actually make money for the individual companies. It is pure show and
      > massive costs. Why do they do it? For show. The individual companies make
      > their money by taking other designs and bringing it to the market

      > Put this into the LINUX perspective. LINUX and GNU are the models walking
      > down the catwalk. And everybody wants to be the model or the designer. But
      > the reality is that the money is made elsewhere.

      True, this is mostly what is referred to as "image advertising." Such advertising is done primarily to raise awareness of people of brands or ideas.

      > And in the case of PERL, Larry Wall is Claudia Shiffer and O'Reilly and
      > ActiveState the actual companies making the products for everybody

      > Sure you can argue that Redhat is the product maker for everybody. But that
      > is only a very small piece and the rest are not making money. Compare the
      > profititability of O'Reilly and ActiveState vs the profitability of Redhat,
      > Mandrake, etc. From there it should become pretty clear that LINUX REALLY
      > needs to figure out how to become a profitable ecosystem.

      Well, I'd have to say that the product makers in the Linux world are mostly the programmers who write the code which we all run on our machines. The commercial distributions play a part in this too, no doubt. I think the commercial Linux distributions have a problem in that that they try to make a living selling what they themselves don't own. Remember that commercial distributions are mostly selling convienience on a couple of CDs: It's much more convienient to install RedHat or Slackware than it is to build your own system from all the parts.

      Larry Wall and kin are in the programmers group, not distribution sellers group. I don't think it's a accurate to say that O'Reilly and RedHat are similar enough in their products to draw a valid comparison because they're really very different; otherwise, your point regarding a self-sustaining economy (ecosystem) stands and is a good one. I hate to say this, but patience is required as it's gonna take some time. Not much, but some time.

      Now really is the time for the LUGs to do their thing. I wish my local LUG were either a little more responsive or easier to contact as it's turning into a real chore to get in contact with someone. May be just some old, dated info on websites too (now there's a subject that fries my ass.)

      Cheers,

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
    13. Re:What to do? by mvdwege · · Score: 2
      She doesn't have to worry, since I told her that there is no way she can screw up the server with hwr level of permissions.

      This is it. This is the sticking point. People are afraid of technology these days, and this is the great inhibitor. Linux users of all proficiency levels tend to love technology and not be afraid of it, but their familiarity looks like wizardry to ordinary people.

      Getting people over that hurdle, that technology is not scary, and that learning to understand technology, even to a limited degree, will improve the way you use your computer and make it actually enjoyable will make people more likely to become computer savvy. Of course, more computer savvy means also that an Operating System that tries to insulate you from the underlying technology is quickly seen as limited and inadequate.

      A nice example that goes along with yours: my flatmate works in childcare and is a complete computer newbie. The first times she used my computer she got the hang of logging in and navigating the Gnome desktop just fine, but she got scared whenever something crashed, thinking it was her fault somehow. After teaching her the rudimentary recovery techniques (Ctrl-Alt-Backspace) and instilling in her the confidence that the occasional crash is not her fault, she has become more confident and enjoys using my computer more and more (judging from my reading of the logs she is starting to spend quite some time behind the keyboard when I'm not around). Heck, she even gets it that the fact that some website doesn't work in Galeon is not her fault, but the dumb webmonkey's. Funny that she doesn't seem to mind just forgetting about those sites and just patronise the ones that do stick to the standards.

      A key component of advocating Linux is advocating a basic understanding of technology, as you so rightly pointed out.

      Mart
      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    14. Re:What to do? by eyepeepackets · · Score: 2

      Well, I suspect the use of the word "revolution" is going to be viewed either good or bad, depending upon the culture you're marketing in and also depending upon the income group which sees the ad/advocacy.

      French folks might really like the revolution idea as a whole. French students might REALLY like the revolution idea; French folks in the $100,000 per year income bracket might really hate it. All the above goes for Americans as well.

      The point I want to make here is that the word "revolution" carries a lot of baggage (connotations) which are going to be perceived in many different (and not always good, not always bad) ways by those doing the perceiving. You might be better off just avoiding it, but again, it's a cultural/class thing and what flies good here in marketing terms may fly like a rock where you are, so it's a judgement call on your part.

      Yes, Linux is a great story! I'm always amazed to see the next chapter too.

      Cheers,

      --
      Everything in the Universe sucks: It's the law!
  15. Re:Linux will not die by JimPooley · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Linux will not die.

    Perhaps so, but it may very well end up in the sad bastards Geek Ghetto, with all the people who bang on about the Amiga not dying...

    --

    "Information wants to be paid"
  16. Mac users, too by wiredog · · Score: 2

    Or, for that matter, AMD enthusiasts. I've talked to several computer journalists over the years who simply stopped writing about anything other than Windows on Intel because of the OS/2, Mac, etc enthusiasts. If they said 20 nice things about the favored system, and one bad thing, they would get tons of flames accusing them of being sellouts for mentioning the one bad thing.

  17. Contribute? Easy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Apart from cutting code, the following activities need addressing:

    - Testing (including usability testing).

    - Writing documentation.

    - Translating documentation and software.

    - Drawing pretty pictures and icons for use in applications.

    - Maintaining bug databases and feature requests.

    - Sales.

    - Sending encouraging noises and objects towards the people cutting the code ;-)

  18. He's right and wrong by countach · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He is right that Linux is constantly under threat - from closed hardware vendors, from legislation, from FUD, from M$ establishing closed protocols etc. And he is right that bigger market share for Linux will tend to make it more of an unstoppable force.

    But I'm not sure if TUX tee-shirts and "advocacy" for the sake of advocacy is going to do much. Linux advocates plod on, and continue to successfully. The distributions get better, the application support better. The whole team is advancing the cause of Linux from all fronts, ok yes advocacy included. It's the whole team which will bring Linux to the forefront, not just burning ourselves out on "advocacy".

  19. Re:The Age of Aggressive Microsoft Bashing is Upon by eyegor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I believe that Microsoft actually doesn't mind that Apple exists.

    #1 Their OS only runs on propriatary hardware and the number of deployed systems is quite small compared to the number of Windows systems.

    #2 Microsoft is able to make money from Apple users through application sales (Microsoft Office)

    #3 Microsoft can point to Apple as being a worthy competitor thereby reducing the effect of Microsofts monopoly. (remember, Microsoft made a big contribution to Apple at a critical time not so long ago).

    Basically, at this stage, Microsoft has nothing to fear from Apple. Once (if ever) Apple is able to take more than 10% or 20% of the market from Windows, watch out.

    Microsoft fears Linux because they realize there is no easy way to make money from the Linux users other than porting (and maintaining various flavors for each version of Linux) Microsoft Office.

    Linux runs on nearly every platform and is primarily used on cheap X86-based hardware rather than expensive propriatary systems.

    --

    Don't anthropomorphize computers, they don't like it.
  20. Duff Dufff Duff by Mattygfunk · · Score: 4, Funny
    Bumper stickers are great, tee shirts with Tux & Linux (writ large) are nice, just do anything that marks you as a happy Linux user. Use your imagination, you'll be surprised at how much fun you can have as a Linux ambassador.

    Me: G'day gorgeous can I buy u a drink?
    Her: I'd love one. Whats that on ur shirt?
    Me: It's Tux from this cool new OS called linux.
    Her: Um... i gotta go stand over ... um.. there.
    Me: Damn that stupid article.

  21. Exactly by by+Linus+Torvalds · · Score: 2
    Many of the distributions are already very good at this, as they present a professional face with professional support. This is what the PHB wants to see.

    Just as we laugh at Microsoft for slinging their anti-Linux FUD, we must be careful not to sling it back. If we present a professional image, and are perceived as a helpful community (I know how tempting it is to yell RTFM!) then we can only attract more people who are becoming disillusioned with Microsoft's insecure and unscalable offerings.

  22. The secret to Linux Soccess by cnmill · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Linux for the average user is technically there, but the real battle is in the hearts and minds of the youth.

    So I propose that we pool our cahs and hire a celecrity pop icon, like scantily-clad Brittan Spears or something to do a Linux PSA with a catchy dance rythm.

    --
    How sleepless is the egg, knowing that which throws the stone forsees the bone.
  23. He has one good point. by MarvinMouse · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The biggest quality point he has is that the majority of computer users could care less which OS they are using, as long as they can point and click their programs into and out of existence, and easily install hardware that they purchase.

    "Windows for Dummies" is one of the best selling dummies books for a good reason. Even windows doesn't always work the way people want it to.

    If the Linux crowd wants to move the Linux OS into the mainstream, they are going to have to make it as easy and simple as possible. More so then windows perhaps. Add more help boxes, give a better manual then windows (There are companies in Japan with excellent manuals,) make it easy to install and remove software/hardware.

    When these objectives are reached, I can guarantee you that more people will use Linux.

    As well, provide an easy way for device drivers to be distributed for linux boxes. A big problem I have found with some of my friends that have switched to Linux is how difficult it is to find good drivers for some of their old peripherals.

    --
    ~ kjrose
  24. Corporations by truthsearch · · Score: 2

    I agree in general, but I'd like to add something important. In the "corporate boardroom" this is irrelevant. I'm sure that when a Red Hat rep walks into a company his materials leave out the $ in Micro$oft. A company needs an internal linux advocate (like me at my company) who speaks intelligently about it. As long as I speak knowledgably and maturely, my promotion of linux is heard. My manager, his boss, and the CTO don't care about the linux community and won't be reading /. or any other linux/open source community sites any time soon. When decisions are to be made, it's my voice they'll remember. Similar to what you said, they'll ignore the community, but perceive linux from the loudest voice they hear: me.

    1. Re:Corporations by Mad+Marlin · · Score: 2
      I'm sure that when a Red Hat rep walks into a company his materials leave out the $ in Micro$oft.

      Sometimes it will slip in even when you aren't the one mangling names like a six-year-old. At my last job, I installed Webalizer on the web server because I wanted an excuse to make the site not quite so hostile to non-IE browsers, and I had heard that it could report browser statistics (which it can). Unfortunately, the author of Webalizer apparently thought it was "cute" to report occurances of Microsoft Internet Explorer as Micro$oft Internet Exploder. Take a look at the sample report for the software (from the Webalizer website) for an example of what I mean. There is no mention of this misfeature anywhere. Luckily I noticed it and figured out how to change the entry name before I showed it to my boss, because he would not have found it funny, and most definitely not professional. Unfortunately, there wasn't a large enough percentage of non-IE users of the site to even pretend to be concerned about cross-browser issues.

  25. What... Again? by gbr · · Score: 2, Funny

    It seems that every week there is a new 'critical period' for Linux. Sheesh. Give it up guys, and lets just agree that we're in one massive 'critical period' instead of a bunch of tiny ones.

  26. Don't fear the apple... by sterno · · Score: 2

    Apple is a more likely competitor? Hardly! Apple had been and will continue to be a niche product. The reason is that the mindset that drives apple is little different than that which drives Microsoft. What Microsoft is afraid of isn't Linux per se. What they are afraid of is that as a whole, corporations will become convinced that open source is the best way to do things. If that happens, Microsoft is completely screwed. Linux just tends to most directly illustrate the threat.

    Unlike many of their competitors (most notable IBM), they have little substantial revenue outside of their software production. They are particularly lacking in the services arena. Thus they are uniquely vulnerable to anything that could force down the margins for software. The operating system has been a commodity for the last 5 years or so and it's only Microsoft's domination of the market that has kept that little fact from disrupting their cash flow. Today, as an operating system, Linux is capable of everything Windows is and that means that people may start to recognizae how commodity Windows is. That will hurt their bottom line if that notion spreads far enough.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    1. Re:Don't fear the apple... by ReelOddeeo · · Score: 2

      If Open Source becomes mainstream, not only Microsoft is screwed. We all are.

      How pray tell is this?

      We are being screwed right now. Open Source will stop us from being screwed.

      --

      Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
  27. actually you do have permission by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 5, Informative

    You can use the Microsoft tradename in your comments as you like.

    Microsoft's right to the trademark only extends to the right to attach it to products being sold. It does not have the right to prevent the of their trademark in public discussions about their company or their products.

    Besides, if you use the correct trademark "Microsoft", then the comments you make will be correctly associated with the correct trademark and not some fake moniker.

    So, use "Microsoft". I try not to ever use MS, Micro$oft or any other false name.

    It is the tradename that should carry the burden of the bad reputation causes by Microsoft's illegal acts. Not some other name.

    --
    NexuSys - Linux support by the best
    1. Re:actually you do have permission by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2

      If you are really that confused about products versus diseases, yes. Your aunt has Microsoft.

      --
      NexuSys - Linux support by the best
    2. Re:actually you do have permission by nathanm · · Score: 2
      So, use "Microsoft". I try not to ever use MS, Micro$oft or any other false name.
      They have "MS" trademarked as well.
  28. elitist attitude? by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Am I detecting a very elitist attitude? I certainly think so.

    That aside, there are many reasons Linux would benefit by having larger marketshare. Briefly...

    1. Device drivers - hw makers can't ignore large segments of the market

    2. Apps, games, etc. same as 1

    3. Choice, currently, Linux is only an option for a small segment of the market, due to 1 and 2. OS develoeprs often tout choice as a reason for OS

    4. Promotion of standards, ie. prevent MS from "embracing and extending" everything under the sun. Don't we want the web to be more standards compliant?

    5. Legislation. If large segments of the market are using Linux, OS can't be easily legislated out of the market like some are attempting to do.

    I think that's enough.

    I'll be blunt, Linux does not need elitist attitudes like I suspect yours is. If I'm wrong, I apologize.

    Also, I don't think anyone is suggesting that Linux completely blow Windows off the desktop, just that it acheives enough marketshare to ensure my 5 points listed above.

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
    1. Re:elitist attitude? by Marasmus · · Score: 2

      I didn't intend an elitist attitude about this... I guess I was hoping to show that the goals and success of Linux can be met as well, if not better, if we don't strive for mass marketshare.

      The need for device driver support, Applications, choice of development OS, and sane legislation is self-evident. This is fueled more by Linux' promotion and adoption of standards than by market share. As far as games go, that's a pretty cutthroat market... As people better understand the need for standards-compliance, these needs will naturally follow. Market share will naturally follow as well, while we more efficiently spend our time working on the quality and standards-compliance of Linux. I think there's a better way of divvying up the time we spend working on Linux than the proposals given in the article.

      --
      .... um, i lost you after "0110100001101001".
  29. Me? Cynical? by JCMay · · Score: 3, Informative

    Let me preface this by admitting that I've always been a computer contrarian. While all my friends in high school wanted Commodore 64s, I went from a VIC-20 to a C-128. While the rest of the world went PC, I had four different Amigas. Now I have Red Hat on my machine at home.

    Maybe I'm just tired, but after reading the peice I came away thinking this guy must be a displaced Amiga user. It reads just like what an old Amgia fan (like me) would have been saying ten years ago about the Amiga.

    I'm of the mind that most people just don't care. Their Wal-Mart-sourced HP Pavillion is good enough for them, and it came with Windows, or they believe it when some pimply-faced kid sneaking out with daddy's car explains why Dell is so much easier than facing a store salesman. It's kinda like beer: some people like German or Canadian(tm) beers, while for others Bud or even Milwaukee's Best is good enough. Some people appreciate the handling of a sports car, others are okay with a Pinto or a Matador.

    I guess I'm just tired of casting my pearls before swine and getting no response. I can't even get my tech-savvy inlaws to try a dual boot. My wife, who doesn't do anything besides web and email won't try it. It doesn't matter that I can do just about anything that they can do with their Windows boxes. It doesn't matter that I have GUIs that are just as fancy and easy as theirs.

    If people want what Linux, or any other contrarian OS has to offer, they'll find it.

  30. not so by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 2
    I do not agree. Apple is very little threat to Microsoft at this point. In fact, Microsoft has much control over the fate of Apple, as soon as Apple becomes a real threat, Microsoft will just pull Office and IE.*

    Microsoft is probably much more affraid of Linux, because Linux is free. Microsoft cannot undercut Linux and burn money until Linux dies.

    * although I suppose this could change now with Mozilla and Open Office almost ready for OSX.

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
  31. Not nearly aggressive enough by noxavior · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously, having stickers will make a few people laugh, but is it a real way to change things? I don't think so.

    After hearing the news of Palladium, I begun to ponder on ways to dramatically increase the Linux base. The best way I have found so far is to approach educational institutions. My university, for example, has a huge people-to-computer ratio, and I suspect that the reason we don't have more computers is that the average users knows only Windows. Since windows machine are a pain to operate ($$$) and the license (more $$$) go into the university budget (more teachers or more machines?) and the fact that computers are inexpensive, they try to push off the responsability of fair education on the student side.

    Ironically, there are rooms filled with x11 terminals to unix system, which are nearly empty. The users who want to get into the system have to personally request access, instead of this being standard, or going with a guest account.

    So when I get back, I hope to push the student assosciation into making real noise about this lack of access problem. At the same time, approach the Linux base we have, and get them involved to teach the newbies that the switch is not nearly so painfull.

    Universities are really worth our time: they have huge visibility, the people coming out of there are the future leaders of ours societies, and are a few thousand strong of smart individuals, capable of installing Linux and using it.

    If there are any people reading this that are from the University of Montréal, write to me or something. It's time to push. As we say in french, Pousse, mais pousse égal.

    --
    Karma:This parrot is dead! (and so is the joke.)
  32. WTF, 75% was feel-good fluff. by whovian · · Score: 2

    In the end I basically agree with the bullets. I do and will continue to promote linux. It was a good reminder that linux has a better chance to stick with the masses if it is promoted not on its geek aspects but through its merits and strengths.

    --
    To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
  33. Unpatched on Windows == unpatched on Linux by Kjella · · Score: 2

    ...both will have exploits, and it doesn't matter if the patch takes a day or a month to come out if it's never applied. I guess if the need was there Linux would have something like Window Critical Updates.

    Besides, why would your average home user be running something like apache or a ftp daemon by default anyway, unless that is something they'd be doing in Windows too? They'll use their ISPs homepage space if anything.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  34. antitrust laws can work by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Antitrust laws can work but it is a slow process.

    The upcoming remedy in the States' case could be very helpful. But, it will not be sufficient. That is why AOL, SUN and BE filed their own private antitrust law suits. But, of course, their law suits will take years to work their way through the legal system. 5-8 years may be involved. And, if Microsoft continues illegal practices, several law suits by linux distributors may join in the mess.

    In some ways the linux distributors should file suit now.

    They could form a class action and sue OEMs and Microsoft to force open fair market opportunities for the distributors. The DELL case is a prime example. And, RedHat has already said publicly that many of the OEMs they have approached turn cold when linux on the desktop comes up.

    Well. A class action of all linux distributors would be in order.

    And, the purpose of that suit would be to stop all marketing agreements which serve to preclude lessor volume products from having fair and open markets.

    The prime example is the huge discount that Microsoft offers if only Microsoft products are sold. Those kinds of agreements are in essence exclusive deals. No OEM can afford to pay $10 more per copy of windows in order to sell 5-10% of its systems pre-loaded with linux (or bare). Economically, it is cost prohibitive.

    Some OEMs may be able to form separate subsidiaries just for the linux sales. Set up two companies. Share on the hardware deals but make separate and distinct software deals. Not that you will fool Microsoft. But, rather that the agreements are not being violated. In fact, they would be complied with since company B would be selling the linux products. And, company B has no deal with Microsoft at all. The fact they would use the same hardware is of no significance.

    And, there may be other ways to avoid Microsoft precluding trade in linux products. Filing law suits is just one of those other ways.

    DELL was made the patsy. They gave it a try until the chief idiots at Redmond took out their baseball bats. I call them idiots because it comes very close to extortion.

    --
    NexuSys - Linux support by the best
    1. Re:antitrust laws can work by zangdesign · · Score: 2

      At what point are you forcing someone to distribute a product for which they make no profit?

      Consider - if I am selling software A, which is comparable to software YB, but the the demand for software A is 1000x the demand for software B, then why should I be forced to sell software B?

      If the cost of support for software B outweighs the returns, then your lawsuit mere forces me into a losing proposition and I will eventually go out of business.

      I would suggest that you sue Dell to find out what the actual demand for Linux-based servers and desktops was. I bet you will find that it probably didn't cover the potential costs of providing support for those installations, REGARDLESS of the contractual obligations to Microsoft. While several vocal /.'ers might have wanted a Dell Linux box, they can hardly be considered a representative market since they are such a small percentage in comparison to the rest of the population.

      There is a point in business in which you have to say "I will not provide services for some customers" because the actual return is not worth the effort expended. You write that market segment off and watch to see if the numbers improve. If so, then you add it back in.

      Personally, I think the market for Linux in the US is going to be fixed at a little above current levels for a while (for desktops mainly). There's not anything "new and different" coming out for that platform that can attract the average user (ie., no killer app). Most of the software being produced seems to be platform-specific rehashes of other stuff. Moreover, most of the desktop distributions are available for free for the people that absolutely have to have it. There is no real incentive to pay for them (ie., if you don't pay, you don't get it legally).

      On the other hand, I could be wrong. Worse things have happenend.

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
    2. Re:antitrust laws can work by spitzak · · Score: 2
      The support cost is ZERO if you sell the Linux box and say quite clearly "No support is provided". In fact you could even rely on somebody blowing money on the machine before they find out if the hardware is all supported by the installed Linux and refuse the refund (bad word of mouth would quickly fix this before many broken machines were sold).

      An even cheaper option is to sell a machine with *no* operating system. You can't answer questions about Linux because that isn't even a product being sold!

      In either case I would expect the machines to be about $30 or $40 cheaper because they do not pay for a MicroSoft license for these machines.

      The fact that Dell does not do this is pretty clear indication of strong-arm tactics by MicroSoft.

    3. Re:antitrust laws can work by zangdesign · · Score: 2

      Your first option is a "no-go" because customers expect support after the sale. Saying "no support is provided" is a really good way of generating a whole lot of ill-will with your customers.

      Selling the machine with no operating system might work, except that one would only be able to provide support if the hardware was clearly malfunctioning. About the best you can say is "it was working when it left the factory." Again, another good way to generate ill-will.

      Finally, why would one bother buying a OS-less Dell, when equivalent performance can be had for less money by buying from a local supplier, with superior support?

      Dell's function in the market is to sell a large number of homogenous machines, regardless of OS. To so requires that one set a standard base package, which they have done.

      Whining about the fact that they don't sell Linux just makes you look like a whiner, not a winner.

      (sorry, couldn't resist).

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
  35. Windows advocates, where are they? by fabiolrs · · Score: 2

    Ok, i know were discussing about Linux advocacy here, but what about windows advocates? Do you people have ever had the chance to read some stupid comments about some stupid windows advocates? Once I read that linux isnt a good OS because it wont work with onboard hardwares, like winmodens. This is so obvious, it wont work because MS dont let the manufacturers release specifications.

    Ok people, its not my intention to start a war here, my point is that advocates existing everywhere, for everything, what makes then diferent is their arguments. Sometimes windows users anoys us with their "linux sux" way of seeing things, sometimes linux users anoys us with their "linux rox" way... i mean, let us all stop fighting and live in peace! :))

    --
    Fabio - Sumare/Sao Paulo/Brazil/South America/Earth/Solar System/Milky Way/Universe
    http://www.morroida.com.br
  36. Blah-dee-Blah-dee-Blah by tarsi210 · · Score: 2

    Whistle me a tune, Adolph. I've heard your line before.

    When Linus first developed this OS the geeks flocked on Usenet to support him. We must support him or this will never survive! He'll quit it! Long live Linus!

    When each distro formed, the drums called the masses to the parade. C'mon, man...use it and advocate it or they'll stop making it! Go Slack/RedHat/Debian/etc!

    When Linux first made an approach into the mainstream industry, supporting servers and mission-critical applications, the magazines and newspapers threw the mud in the face of Linux. Linux? Won't last. Can't last. Buncha geeks supporting it. HA! And the wave of fear once again traveled among the masses, To arms! To arms! We'll lose the day if we don't advocate! Convert your grandmother! Quiltix!

    And so now, from a guy who is an NT network sysadmin and cites doomsday evidence of the revolution we hear the cry to war again.

    Listen, folks: The war isn't over, nor is this a critical junction in the life of Linux.

    The war has always been there...why wouldn't it? The brainchild of a geeky programmer is now running the huge servers of major industries. You can't tell me that the war hasn't been fought already and will still be fought on every line. It's not a single assault, folks, it's a never-ending push towards an ideal that we've conceived (or have been given) and we now advocate.

    Advocate Linux.....*snort* What do you think we've been doing all this time?

  37. more than just the code by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2, Interesting

    More than just the code.

    There are many things you can do short of coding.

    You can participate in beta programs. Almost all linux distributors have them. Some are more open than others. But, a lot of very useful work can be contributed in that way. And, it is not just limited to finding and reporting bugs either.

    You can help by proposing alternative outlines or menu structures.

    Right now Mandrake 8.2 is a fine distribution for many purposes. But, the menu outline is highly confusing. In part this is caused by the separate contributions of GNOME and KDE. And, in part it is caused by the very nature of collecting together contributed work from many separate or independant sources.

    Windows, MAC, Xandros Linux, Corel Linux and Lindows each benefit from an effort to reform the presentation to the user into at least a chewable structure.

    The LSB is an example of this kind of reform at the internal level. But, the face presented to the user needs some real improvement if the popularity of linux is going to increase. It has to be more organized, consistent and understandable.

    For the user, Interface Design is a lot more important than the code. And, you can conclude from that the success of linux is going to be based upon how well the interface is designed rather than the quality of the coding. Microsoft has proven that to be the case time and time again.

    --
    NexuSys - Linux support by the best
  38. Disruptive Tech: Disruptive cognitive experience by flacco · · Score: 2
    I'm all for the well-measured, reasonable approach, but sometimes it does take a cognitive shock in order to break through years of habit and assumptions.

    Especially with people who are incapable of thinking analytically about software. Inertia is a powerful force, but standing friction is powerful too. Occasionally you have to kick something hard to get it moving in the right direction.

    --
    pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
  39. you are paying for IE by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2

    IE is not free.

    It costs billions to develop. And, there is no reason whatsoever that a monopolist who knows you must buy it would price it at zero. None. There are no reason.

    Oh, they can lie about it.

    But, Judge Jackson had it correct. IE is free when downloaded as is any product that you get without paying money. But, when you part with cash and you get IE in the box, you did in fact pay part of your money for IE.

    Ask your mother. Ask your mother about those toys in your Happy Meal. She will tell you that they are not free. The toy in CrackerJacks is not free either. But, the HappyMeal toys are better, right? And, the HappyMeal costs more too, right?

    Do not be confused into thinking gum you buy at the store must be free because a friend of yours gave you a free stick the day before. (That is the stupid argument that IE must be free because "others" can download it without paying. That is not what determines the price of your HappyMeal.)

    --
    NexuSys - Linux support by the best
    1. Re:you are paying for IE by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2

      Read the court decision by Judge Jackson.

      He clearly pointed out that IE is free when you download it just like a stick of gum is free if I give you one.

      But, it is illogical to conclude that the copy you pay cash for is free just like it is illogical to conclude that the pack of gum you buy is free.

      Judge Jackson is way ahead of you on this. The law is way ahead of you on this.

      When you pay cash for a bag of bolts, each bolt costs you a portion of your cash. That is reality. If the salesman claims that the 1/4" stuff is free, he is pulling your leg or lying outright. And, if you know that the 1/4" stuff is bundled so that the vendor can preclude competing 1/4" products, then you know you have a liar.

      That is particularly true with the R&D costs billions and continues to cost real money on an ongoing basis.

      Monopolist have no reason to sell products for free. They do not have to. They just force you to pay. It is not your choice what so ever. Unless the federal courts require that you be given a choice.

      --
      NexuSys - Linux support by the best
    2. Re:you are paying for IE by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2

      No, I specifically said that even Judge Jackson said that IE is free when downloaded and you do not pay money for it. That is true with all products that you do not pay for when you get it.

      But, that does NOT mean the product IE is always free. It depends upon whether or not you get out your wallet.

      If you do not pay money, then IE is free for Solaris.
      If you do not pay money, then IE is free for Linux.
      If you do not pay money, then IE is free for the Mac.
      If you do not pay money, then IE is free for windows too.

      But, if you do pay money it absolutely is not free when you get out your cash.

      Do you understand the difference between paying cash money and not paying cash money? That is the question.

      Confusing your transaction with other transactions does not answer the question.

      So, it depends not upon what other software you have or what it is for, but rather if you got out your wallet or not in exchange. And, what may or may not apply to a friend or yours does not apply to you. What may have applied to you last week does not apply to a transaction you may conduct today.

      So, if you downloaded a free copy of IE the day before you buy a new computer but your new computer included IE, in that transaction IE was NOT free.

      It is just like any other product when bundled in the sale.

      --
      NexuSys - Linux support by the best
    3. Re:you are paying for IE by AppyPappy · · Score: 2
      IE is not free.

      Funny, I downloaded it the other day for free. And so is the Happy Meal toy. They gave me a whole box of them when I asked for some to put in Operation Christmas Child shoeboxes. If I got a Happy Meal without a toy, I don't get a discount (done that). Sounds like free to me.

      It's the toys aren't free to you, let me know and I'll send you one.

      Appy Pappy, Esq, Programmer, FunGuy at Large

      --

      If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem

    4. Re:you are paying for IE by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2

      Asking for charitable contributions does not make the toy free. You should know better than that.

      Plus, Judge Jackson is way ahead of you. He correctly decided that when you download a copy of IE and do not pay cash, it is free just like you have decided.

      But, that is not the case when you pay cash money for it.

      So, you and Judge Jackson agree on at least one point.

      The problem is that you can not distinquish between my giving you a piece of gum (free) and your paying for your own pack 10 minutes later (not free).

      The judge does.

      --
      NexuSys - Linux support by the best
  40. Actions speak louder than words by hopeless+case · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If you want to convince someone (like your employer, say) to use linux, solve a problem for them using linux that they would be helpless to solve in windows.

    I am a communications engineer working at a company that operates a satellite mobile data network. When I started working for them in 1998, my first task was to get on top of their network statistics and figure out how to monitor the performance of their network.

    I started assembling a data analysis and display system using linux by piecing together the fantastic open source software packages available like tcpdump, ethereal, R, vnc, apache, bash, and many others. The continued development of this system has become my full time job and my employers and I couldn't be happier with each other.

    Internally we are still a windows shop but linux is slowly taking over more and more functions because it solves our problems better.

  41. Linux Advocacy? by FooBarWidget · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Is being a Linux advocate easy? Sometimes it is (bumper stickers, shirts, PC badges) and other times it requires more intestinal fortitude (talking to a Windows user about Linux, asking the manager of the computer store about their Linux offerings)."

    I convinced somebody to try Linux. So he download and installed Mandrake 8.2 (a newbie distribution). He doesn't know how big the swap should be so he made it 3 GB.

    We must be able to communicate, so he needed an M$N client. I told him to download KMerlin, and told him to extract kmerlin-0.something.tar.gz, go to the extracted folder, click Tools->Open Terminal, type ./configure && make, su and make install. Several reboots later he finally succeeded in doing those things. He typed the wrong commands, didn't use enough spaces, etc.
    I think it took 1 hour for him to install KMerlin...
    He even asked me how to *start* KMerlin.

    He wants KaZaA. At the time I didn't know how to run KaZaA in Wine so I gave him the URL to LimeWire. He also needed JRE so I pointed to java.sun.com. He couldn't find out how to start the installer, so I told him to open a console, and type "sh ./jre2.0something.bin". Then he asks me what to do with all that text. I told him to press "q" (no he couldn't figure that out). Then I told him to go to the folder where jre2something.bin is and doubleclick on the RPM. Several minutes later (he couldn't find the folder...), JRE was installed.

    He couldn't find out how to start LimeWire installer, so I told him to open a console and type "sh LimeWire.bin". That didn't work. And several minutes later I found out that Kaffe was in the way (because of all kinds of errors from /usr/bin/java). So I told him to rm /usr/bin/java and proceed. It finally worked.

    Total time to install LimeWire: 3 or 4 hours (no kidding!).

    I'll skip the details about installing MPlayer (I first wanted him to use Xine but somehow Xine freezes at startup). It took a *very* long time (2 days or something). Partially because of this GCC 2.96 mess, and partially because he had to edit ~/.mplayer/conf to make things work correctly.

    A few days later he removed Linux (he even said Linux sucks because you can't access Linux partitions from Windows!) and concluded that the reason companies don't use Linux is because it's too unuserfriendly.
    I tried to help him, but this man will hate Linux forever.

    So... is it really a good thing to continue with this advocacy thing?

    1. Re:Linux Advocacy? by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

      Yes and you shouldo it THE RIGHT WAY. First off, one mistake you mad was installing/showing him something that needed to be compiled instead of sticking to binaries. Users do not want to compile their software. They want to use it. If KMerlin was not available in a RPM (PLEASE....use RPM on Mandrake and Redhat.....installing from source makes the file system a total mess...never mind when he trys to uninstall it.), use something else, or MAKE a RPM for him. I used ccMSN (Not sure if it had a RPM available or not). Going outside a Distros or a UNIX's packaging system should never ever be done on a desktop system unless there is no other way (and for the developers, why don't you MAKE a RPM????).

      As far not being able to see the Linux partitions in a dual boot situation.....how about installing on a FAT32 file system?? I know, it should not be done that way, but it would have worked well for this guy and he would have been able to see his home directory on Windows and Linux.

      Video on Linux, well, with exceptions of Ogle and maybe xaw, well, it sucks. I even think Ogle was not the greatest ( I think I had a RPM for it.), but it worked for me.Windows is Leaps and bounds ahead of Linux here. You can't even see Quicktime on Linux, although that's not the community's help for lack of trying (Sorenson CODEC anyone?).

      Limewire.....why is there not a binary RPM for this??? I found a SRC rpm, but nothing compiled. Also, in trying to get his Limewire to work, you probably blitzed the Kaffe installation he may have needed for Java! NEVER just rm the directory until you look into why it was there in the first place. If it's an empty directory, well, thats one thing. If there's stuff in there you just broke a whole lot of stuff.

      I have no idea what your Linux experience is. If it is extensive, your post sure did not show that. I don't mean to sound like I am flaming you, but you have to help these folks and do things the right way FIRST. Then, when that doesn't work, only do you try the hacker way (and teach him by displaying the read me.....don't just blindly ./configure && make, su then make install. Sometimes by doing that, you miss the important stuff telling you that you must have x installed or y not installed. It may have provided insight to why you were having your problem. Best of all, you build good habits in him. Tell him use a RPM or DEB (if Debian) all the itme if possible and only use a tarball when the need is dire or there is no other way. You will have a much more manageble system for a new user.

      Also, and I am going to probably follow this rule as well eventually, but never install Linux on the same machine when the main produciton was occuring on Windows. Set this up with the intention that he would LEARN on this system, and only use it if he's not trying to get something done. Dual booting sucks(and is cool all at the same time) and if all he has to do is login, well, that will improve his opinion drastically. If he has cable modem service, set both machines up on a Cable/DSL router. Setup Apache and show him how he can test web pages internally (no servers on RR ya know). Actually SPEND a evening a week with him and TEACH him how to use it. If he asks why and you say it's just done that way, that's not acceptable. Find out WHY Linux does it the way it does, and tell him (if you can). Don't just install it and try to instruct him on the phone and in e-mail. Maybe you'd have had a Linux lover on your hands instead of a hater.

      --

      Gorkman

    2. Re:Linux Advocacy? by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 2

      Yep. RPMfind is your friend! Plugged in Limewire and found the following:

      Found 2 RPMs for limewire

      limewire-2.0.2-1.src.rpm
      limewire-2.0.2-1.noarch.rpm

      The Summary was as follows for both rpm's:

      Ad-free client for the Gnutella peer-to-peer file sharing system.

      As for KMerlin, I could not find any. If I had a Redhat or Mandrake system I would try to figure out what I'd need to build the spec file htne build an RPM, but right now I am happy doing what I have bene doing and My Redhat or Mandrake system can wait.

      I tried. But he refused and said that he could do it alone.

      Boy that guy is a stubborn person. This is like learning everything all over again. It really is for folks like this who have learned Windows/DOS a long time ago. Some people can't apply then learn the differences as well as most of the Slashdot readership. That guy must have been a MCSE or something. He can't admit that another OS can be better if it does things differently. Oh and he needs to clue himself in about companies using Linux (from the earlier post)....of course Linux use is spreading to more companies everyday (Xerox uses it in some printers now I understand). This guy also thinks he knows computers because he can grok Windows. If all you know is Windows, well, you don't know much. My MOM knows Windows and she would not know where to start with Linux (what's a login....what's root?).

      Now for the FAT32 thing...I was going to say something about the security and whether permissions work properly, but I am not sure and I can't find the answer, so I won't guess! In the case of your friend, I don't think it would have been much of an issue as he'd probably be in Windows 50-60 percent of the time as he was learning it. If it was a permanent thing, then of course you would not run fat32. Of course I would not know as I don't run FAT32 for Linux but more for speed then security.

      Your friend wasn't ready for it to begin with. It was nice he tried! I am glad you found someone else to help. Now, for me, I am going to try and find a machine I can dedicate to Linux (No DUAL BOOT! I hate it...it sucks). Next after that I intend to find a RS/6000 (for AIX....Love AIX! :) ).

      --

      Gorkman

  42. Does a guy running NT a good linux advocate make? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 2, Interesting

    First of a little bit about me:
    I consider myself a hacker. Not because I am a good coder, I am not can just make a living in PHP, or a whizkid who makes computers out of egg cartons. I consider myself a hacker cause I love messing about with computers. I am right now working on wooden case with water cooling so I can have a really really quit PC. There is a lot of stuff to read and find out about for that but that's what I enjoy. Soon I will start the building and I enjoy that to. The testing will come hopefully after that and yes even that I do enjoy.
    The same goes for making websites. I like figuring out how to make things happen and weird config files, obscure documentation are just part of the challenge. I don't use a single GUI or shell for any of my configuration needs cause I don't need them, want them, like them, thrust them etc etc.

    Now the point
    Over the years I have worked as a developer in both regular back-office IT and web development. I have worked there with brilliant and hopeless co-workers. Sometimes you can rely on them and sometimes it is just easier to do it youreselve. One thing I have however learned is NEVER EVER try to convert anyone. Worst mistake you can ever make is to try to learn anyone to code that is not already doing so. There is a reason they are not doing it. THEY DON'T LIKE IT!
    Call it the difference between people who code cause they like or because they see it as a career move.

    Same really with linux. Those that are using it or are picking it up of their own free will deserve our help, and considering my own experience get it. Those that don't shouldn't be dragged in kicking and screaming. Take a very close look at apple. All attempts to increase its market share have fallen flat but so have all attempts to drive it out of the market. What is wrong with being a niche enviroment? Personally I would prefer if all these zealots would focus on BSD instead and leave linux alone. Linux for people who want linux, Windows for people who want windows, and mac for people who want mac, oh and pen and paper for everyone else.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  43. The Relevance of Philosophy. by The+Monster · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Is it just me who believes that philosophy is completely irrelevant to Linux?
    Probably not just you, but anyone who believes that doesn't get it.

    The philosophies of Linux are not only relevant, but essential:

    1. Open Source. Whether you're a purist like RMS or not, the ability to [have someone working for you] see and occasionally modify source code is central to the value that Linux offers. It makes it possible to optimize the OS and core applications for specific hardware and purpose of the machine, customize the system to completely remove unused components for security reasons, etc.
    2. Open Protocols. Even when we don't have access to source code, we have well-established open standards for how programs providing certain services should communicate with other programs. This philosophy grew out of, and simultaneously made possible a corollary *nix tenet...
    3. Open Data Formats - Text Files. The configuration info for a program is held in an .rc or .conf file that can be accessed just like any other file, not buried under layers of misdirection of GUIDs like {02468ACE-3F57-11AF-B579-08002D30DEFD} within a database stored in a proprietary format. This in turn makes possible another facet of the philosophy...
    4. Interchangeable Parts. Don't like EMACS? Fine. Use vi, or a thousand other editors. They all manipulate text files, and once the file is created, your compiler, interpreter, or whatever really doesn't care. And this fits into another *nix philosophy...
    5. Small, Sharp Tools, or Infinite Diversity in Infinite Combination. Most of the work to be done on a *nix system can be accomplished by combining specific tools in a shell script. Metaphors such as piping and command substitution make it unecessary to compile a custom application to do what can be accomplished via
      fubar `snafu -z` | sort +3 | less
    Without these philosophies, there would be no reason to prefer Linux to any other OS
    --

    [100% ISO 646 Compliant]
    SVM, ERGO MONSTRO.

  44. HOW ABOUT A "FAMILY" LINUX DISTRIBUTION? by takochan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    What linux needs is a "family distribution".

    It should have a light window manager (gnome is too slow on older hardware like P200s that often end up in our parents houses, but still work fine with MS windows), a web browser, mail, easy connection to the internet via dialup/adsl with wizards to set all this up, and an office suite.

    Most functions of the OS should be easily accessible by wizards and menus (I don't think mom wants to be using VI to adjust her screens size/ colors/ resolution).

    You should be able to put in 1 CD, (and a floppy if necessary), boot it, and have a whole linux install get set up with friendly menu's and then at the end of the install, everything should just work, with the window manager working, nice fonts, all devices (nothing esoteric, ie. modem, printer, sound, basic lan if there is one, the screen/graphics in the right graphics mode and internet browsing/getting connected to the internet/email and office).

    So far, though I love linux, it seems to be not there yet (though I don't think we are that far away).

    Is there anyone working on a standard linux distribution that is 'install and run' for mom and dad type non technie folks?

    Now that would be the killer application that makes Redmond scared. .

    What are we waiting for?

    1. Re:HOW ABOUT A "FAMILY" LINUX DISTRIBUTION? by MsGeek · · Score: 3, Informative

      This exists: http://www.lycoris.com/ .

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
    2. Re:HOW ABOUT A "FAMILY" LINUX DISTRIBUTION? by AndrewHowe · · Score: 2

      Agreed. I'm installing Linux, and it's saying, "you haven't made a swap partition" or something. OK, well, I suppose I had better make one then. How big? Well errrm... Reboot into Windows, read the install readme, ok I printed it out now so I can refer to it again. It seems that my swap file size should be somehow related to the size of my physical memory. No hard and fast rules, and no real clues either. Shall I just make it quite big? Or will that slow it down? Should I read the kernel VM code to work out what it is doing or something?
      OK so I decide on a Gig of swap space. How much is that in cylinders?
      What is wrong with, "Linux will now create a swap partition. Click "OK" to do this automatically, or "Customize" if you would like to manually adjust the size or location of the partition"???

    3. Re:HOW ABOUT A "FAMILY" LINUX DISTRIBUTION? by AndrewHowe · · Score: 2

      Well, the last Linux I installed was Corel (what a bag o shite) and before that it was SuSE 6. Well, finally, someone sorted it out. Whoopee.
      And as for your condescending final note, well, what more could I expect?

  45. Re:Tux's Witnesses? by Spruce+Moose · · Score: 2, Funny

    We've been going door to door in your neighbourood spreading the word about Linux. Did you know that Linus loves you?

  46. RTFM by nuggz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Sorry, some people don't read any documentation and demand help, and are quite rude about it.

    "Real experts and Gurus" don't want to waste their time with someone who can't even put in the effort to read the documentation, and listen to instructions.

    I consider myself somewhat experienced, I help with problems/finding solutions, and interactions that people have.

    If the user can't even be bothered to read the HOWTO first, then why should I waste my time helping them?

    1. Re:RTFM by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 2

      I'm going to boldly risk some bad karma here in what some will interpret as flamebait. I admit I am venting here, but I think it's appropriate and needs to be said.

      RTFM? A Linux newbie has ISOs and a command prompt. Which FM would that be?

      Man page? What's a man page? Typing "man" on a command prompt is not intuitive. Who has ever learned of the existence of man pages without human intervention? Furthermore, who has learned to use tar, find, or grep using the documentation in man pages? It gets even more fun when you discover that man pages are depreciated (according to some), and that you must use info. Still other packages have docs in tex.

      Readme? What readme? Well, a simple rpm -q --whatprovides (filename) shows that the command I'm wondering about, bliffd, is in the package bliffblarf-1.2.3.6-2.3.4, and it's docs are located in /usr/share/doc/bliffblarf-1.2.3.6-2.3.4 in tex format. Now all I have to do is set up a postscript printer, and get tex to spew a postscript document to the printer, and then I can read the docs. So tell me again how this is not a hazing ritual?

      And for HOWTOs, the next thing on my provided list of potential documentation sources I would not have known about without being told, a google on grep, find, or tar howto yields no useful information on these very basic Linux commands. The closest you come is a few examples of grep in a VMS to linux howto. Indeed, examples of any basic linux command appear to occur in inverse proportion to the likelihood of their daily use.

      Furthermore, I've found that documentation is often incomplete and/or outdated. Most of the advanced features of some of the packages I use professionally are known only to those on the mailing list.

      I know why Linux documentation is in its current state. I understand the problems of rapidly changing software, maintained by a large number of programmers, and that documentation is impossible to maintain effectively. None of these things prevent me from using Linux or from advocating it. But the state of affairs is hardly one where a complete newcomer could be expected to RTFM.

    2. Re:RTFM by HiThere · · Score: 2

      man paged deprecated? But info is generally both unreadable and unusable. man pages work, and generally have the answers.

      === This paragraph moved to the top ====
      So how do I figure out which manual to read?
      Systems should ship with a help-system spider. I.e., something like a web spider, that operated off files stuck in a folder called, perhaps, /usr/help/html . pdf's could go in /usr/help/pdf, etc. But pdf's are only as searchable as the index that the author put in them.
      === end of moved text ===

      Well, man pages don't always have the answers, and you sure need to already know what to look for. But info is night unto useless. And rarely has as much info as man, even when you find it.

      P.S.: Even after you've got X working, it still isn't clear which FM to R. If my internet connection is working, I generally search there. Perhaps it's on my computer somewhere, but the help pages are ... bad. The Gnome documentation only covers Gnome, and doesn't have links to anything else. The KDE documentation only covers KDE. Nobody tells you where to find, say, how the change the runlevel at boot time. Or other similar configuration issues.

      E.g., I want to install some software that insists on a library, but some other software uses an appearantly totally different library, and rpm says that a conflict is occuring. How do I solve this?

      Compiling from source doesn't solve this one, I've tried. Currently the solution that I've adopted is, wait for the next version of the software, and hope that they've reconcilled their libraries. (And leave installed the version that came with the distribution. I don't know what it does, so I have no idea how important it is that it be left alone. Even if I knew what it did, if it's being used by something important (say a window manager), then removing it might break things that have no relation to what it does. And the only way to tell is to try. Not good.

      Open Source should be the answer, after all, I'm a programmer. But I don't have a bunch of spare systems, and I don't have unlimited time. And there's a whole bunch of lines of code in even one of those libraries.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  47. Yo Hemos by chuckw · · Score: 2

    Moderators: WARNING This post may seem inflamatory or trollish. If it seems that way, you probably didn't understand it.

    Hemos: I really wish you'd refrain from telling us how you feel about the article on the front page. If you have something to say, why not post a comment?

    --
    *Condense fact from the vapor of nuance*
  48. Re:The Age of Aggressive Microsoft Bashing is Upon by Frater+219 · · Score: 2
    Slashdot, as well as the other Linux sites are constantly bombarding us with news of Microsoft's dastardly deeds.

    I doubt it would be necessary if Microsoft were not still bombarding us with dastardly deeds. Slashdot and other Linux sites are in a peculiarly good position to notice Microsoft's dirty tricks, seeing as Linux has been since 1998 a chief target of said tricks. (October 1998, as you may recall, was the date of the leaking of the first Halloween Document, an internal Microsoft report which called for the company to "deny [open-source software] entry into the market" rather than out-competing it within the market.)

    Perhaps you find it boring that Microsoft critics are saying the same things today as in 1998 and before -- that Microsoft destroys free markets, perjures itself before courts and Congress, harms democracy and fair & free trade, curtails user freedoms, and so forth. Sadly, it's still true, and I suspect that people will keep saying it as long as it is.

  49. Re:Well that's nice.. (oops) by Enry · · Score: 2

    Whoops. Meant Civ II: Call to Power.

    Haven't played Civ III yet.

  50. Wise words from Ghandi ... by joe_fish · · Score: 2

    First they ignore you.
    Then they laugh at you.
    Then they fight you.
    Then you win.

    3 out of 4 so far...

  51. Linux users aren't cheap by WebMasterJoe · · Score: 2

    If you look at the Linux demographic, we're not really a cheap bunch. We generally have disposable income, and generally are well-educated. But the reason we come across as a bunch of cheapskates is that we don't spend our money on Linux software. The hundreds of dollars I didn't spend on Windows 2000 server, Office 2000/XP, Photoshop, MS Exchange, and so on all went towards my car, a car stereo mp3 player, my home receiver, my Playstation2, my DVD player, some Shure 57 microphones, rent on a better apartment, and good beer. Not to mention the computer hardware... And I still had enough money left over to download a half dozen ISOs and install on my souped-up computer.

    Linux users still spend money, but usually it's on other stuff - stuff they wouldn't buy if they had to drop $100 every time Microsoft released a new version of its OS (and much more if you want to run a server). I'm not saying we shouldn't occasionally donate $50 to SuSE or whoever and get a shiny box with prettier discs (unless you're a big fan of Sharpie Art). But more industries benefit from Linux users than the software industry.

    --
    I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
  52. Re:Wise words from Churchill ... by joe_fish · · Score: 2


    This is not the end.
    It is not even the beginning of the end.
    But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning

  53. How to stop newbies from rehashing FAQs by yerricde · · Score: 2

    Sure. I'd like to contribute to linux by answering newbie questions (even though 90% of these can be found by a google search or the first 5 lines of the man page)

    I answer the questions, and then I tell where I found the answer (e.g. For a more detailed answer, look in DJGPP FAQ, section 8, page foo). From my experience in comp.os.msdos.djgpp, this gets the user on the road to reading more of the product's available documentation.

    Would there be a way for non-coders to make a contribution to GNU software?

    Write documentation. Write bug reports, but make sure to include precise reproduction instructions. Look at the Mozilla.org help pages; the ideas on those pages apply to most free software projects.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  54. Re:help, but don't spoonfeed by kin_korn_karn · · Score: 2

    Learning is a highly subjective process.

    Some people don't learn by reading. They have to be told and shown. That does not make them any less valuable, or unintelligent, that makes them different.

    It's certainly no reason to turn them away from Linux, because there are a lot more of those people than there are geeks like us that can learn from reading.

  55. If you're recommending Linux, use real data. by dwheeler · · Score: 2

    If you're recommending the use of [GNU/]Linux to decision-makers, then you should use real data as part of your rationale. Take a look at my (long!) article, Why Open Source Software / Free Software (OSS/FS)? Look at the Numbers! , which has a collection of useful facts and figures (including market share, reliability studies, etc.).

    --
    - David A. Wheeler (see my Secure Programming HOWTO)
  56. ask Microsoft by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2

    Ask Microsoft what they have spent on R&D, Marketing and legal fees in order to force IE upon all consumers.

    Go ahead. Ask them.

    You can also ask them what they told stockholders about the money allocated to cover for those expenses. Hint: Microsoft publicly claims that 20% of all OS revenue is allocated to "unearned revenue" which Microsoft says includes IE. And, that was before they stopped free phone support. Let me see now. What is 20% of all of the OS revenue (including servers I presume)?

    Yea. That is zero alright. IE must be free after all since no revenue is attributed to its sale by Microsoft.

    You know, sometimes when people lie they tell other people a different story.

    It is sort of like CNet explaining to the public why they censor some opinions. They may tell one person one story but tell another person a completely contradictory story proving that one or the other must be false. So which is it, CNET?

    Was censorship imposed because the opinions were highly regarded by CNet Community Manager? Or, was censorship imposed because some unidentified readers asked for the censorship? Or, was it because some views contrary to Microsoft's interests have caused a drop in readership or the use of Talkback?

    Which one is it? Do any of them justify defrauding the reader by engaging in secret censorship?

    Or, to tie it back to IE... is IE so good that Microsoft has to lie to the public about the price being charged?

    --
    NexuSys - Linux support by the best
  57. Well... by virg_mattes · · Score: 2

    You're here, so I'd say you already have.

    Virg

  58. Forming a united front by wytcld · · Score: 2

    How much should we focus on Linux, as compared to the broader front of *nix? Solaris is converging with Linux; and OSX is, as a *nix, a lot closer to Linux than OS9 was. Is there anything wrong with a world in which *nix beats Microsoft on the OS front, and we end up with a market that's 40% OSX, 30% Linux, 15% Solaris, 5% *BSD and a 10% Windows remnant? Sun's coming around to understanding the game this way. How do we get Apple to join in?

    --
    "with their freedom lost all virtue lose" - Milton
  59. A Real Difference by AmericanInKiev · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The watershed moment for linux will occur when development becomes self-sustaining without compromising the integrity of Open Source.

    In the US, this could readily be accomplished by setting up recipient non-profit organization for the purpose of handling OS code donations by individual programmers.

    Take SourceForge, add a non-profit organization using SourceForge for infrastructure. Every Open Source contribution/bug fix made to SourceForge is valuated by experts (modded) and a receipt generated listing the "replacement value of donated works of art".

    Now every hour a programmer works on Linux is tax deductable - which is pretty good pay for a gainfully employed programmer. You can't work full time - but you could work as long as one year at Open Source - funded on donations alone (Last half of one year and first half of the next - then go back to a real job for the rest of the year tax free. The taxes you save pay for the first half of the year.

    This creates an endless fund for Open Source without asking for donations (Except donations of the code itself).

    AIK

  60. Good Answer, but Incomplete by virg_mattes · · Score: 2

    > If you're not sure what you can do to help, ASK!

    Ask whom? If I'm in a position not to know what to do to help, I'm likely also in the position not to know who to go to to offer. Can you provide links (or even some Google search phrases or something) to get us all started? I personally know how to find these resources, but I've met a number of people with some valuable skills to contribute (graphic work and copyediting, to name two) who aren't as adept at it.

    Virg

  61. Re:The Age of Aggressive Microsoft Bashing is Upon by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2
    I feel the feeling exact opposite is happening. Slashdot, as well as the other Linux sites are constantly bombarding us with news of Microsoft's dastardly deeds.

    True, but there are a lot of them. And there's plenty of Linux news too. Software updates mainly, but also interesting and useful discussion on what can be made better.

    The idea that Microsoft is paranoid and fearing Linux might be true, but is totally overblown. Microsoft fears any competition, the most likely competitor is Apple more than Linux.

    Hardly. I don't see Microsoft claiming Apple is *the* threat to them. At the moment, they're getting their asses kicked in the server arena mainly, rather than the desktop, that's what worries them for now.

    Oh, and for the record, Linux already has higher market share than MacOS X, which is probably why they want Apple to speed up deployment of it (no, really, this isn't a troll)

  62. Re:Praise Jesus and Pass the Linux!! by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 2
    I do really wonder what the point is sometimes of these advocates; what is the benefit of 'controlling the world?' Is it more just an attitude that Microsoft needs to go? What's the real priority here?

    It's a matter of network effects. People don't use Windows because it's better, they use it because everyone else uses it. Hardware manufactuers support it, your friends can help you explain it, your boss will be able to read your work. If everyone else starts using Linux, that makes my Linux using experience better.

  63. I'm Not So Certain by virg_mattes · · Score: 2

    > Most Linux distributions are far more feature-rich than Windows, that much I will agree on, but you would have to be -incredibly- naive, or incredibly biased, to state that your standard Linux distribution is easier to install, maintain and use than, say, Windows XP.

    I'm not so sure that this isn't a case of familiarity versus true ease-of-use. To give you an example, if your car had controls like an airplane (with the obvious exclusion of controls for pitch), would your car be harder to use? You bet it would. Is that because aircraft controls are intrinsically harder to handle than automobile controls? Not really. Once you've practiced with them, they're actually pretty easy to use.

    By the same token, I think that a large portion of ease-of-use for MS OSes (and computers in general) is that the general public is so used to them, John Q. Public perceives the Windows interface as the "standard" against which to measure everything else. To go point by point, installing WinXP is not an easy task. It's a LOT better than it was in Win95 or WinNT, but it still isn't something that John Q. is going to want to try to do. Maintaining is the same story. Most of the people I know who aren't computer-based (hobbyists or those who work with (not just on) computers daily) do very little to maintain their machines. It's easy to say that this is because they don't need to, but that's not really true. Every time I visit a neighbor's house and do something on their computer, I find that there's a lot of cruft and such on the machine that interferes with how it runs. It's just so subtle as it happens that they don't really notice the loss of performance until I get in and clean up (note that this is true of all computers, Macs, WinPCs and LinPCs alike). As for using them, see my note above about familiarity. It's an ugly reality that since Windows is the ruler, everything Linux gets measured against it, but that doesn't make it a given that Linux really is harder to use. For those who grew up around UNIX systems, Linux is a breeze and Windows is a pain.

    Virg

  64. Now you hit it. Must Cry Bullshit and rant. by Erris · · Score: 2
    Whatever your view of each operating system, the end marker is that they are tools. And when you're selecting the right one you need to be independent, you need to consider all the alternatives, and most of all you need to be unbiased.

    Perfect! Because you have two choices they must be equal, right? It would be "biased" to express a preference for one based on previous experience, reading licenses, and common senese? Poop.

    That's the one thing that Jamie Harrison did not mention in his article. I would not recomend XP or any of the newer M$ offerings to anyone and neither would any honest and informed person. Being able to see this does not make me an "RMS wannabe" nor will it make my business fail, unless of course my business is M$ dependent. It is not, I am not and no one I know is.

    Business users must object to the unilateral change clauses, complete lack of control over their computers, licensed inforced "right" of M$ to review all information on any XP system, and to the outrageous total cost of ownership of M$ systems. My experience with w2k here at work has been bad enough for me to not ever recomend it.

    Home users must object to the same total lack of control and privacy as well as the increasing instability and decreasing perfomance of M$ systems. If we look at the last two years or so of dismal computer sales, it looks like I'm not alone in my dissapointment. It is there that Linux, BSD, Mac and others are stepping, not just the server room. A much larger percentage than 10 of the web groups my wife belongs too are Linux users. Normal stuff, stay at home mom stuff, not technical pages or groups are filling with linux users.

    The sad fact is that we should anticipate a fall off of linux users. M$ has made computing so bad that many people are simply giving up. Instead of buying their third or fourth new fancy coputer, they are just leaving the old one broken and putting their time and resources elsewhere. This is the bite of the "dot com bomb". Bitterly disapointed people are shouting at the world, "All that shit I did not like I do not need." Those people will not move to Linux and might not ever have needed a computer to begin with. They will do without email at home and buy a set top box to watch digital TV. As the overall pool of computer users shrinks, the percentage of Linux may rise but the numbers will grow slowly if at all. M$ will continue to trumpet "Linux is Dead", or at least their dependents in PC world etc will. Advocacy will help, but I'm prepared for a complete lack of interest in all things computer for years to come.

    My form of advocacy is simple. I carry a laptop with Debian on it and use it when I actually need a computer. It's an ancient P150 thinkpad with 16M of ram and a 6GB hard disk. I doubt it would even run XP, but it does what I want flawlessly and looks great. People ask and I'm happy to show and offer a free install for them. Next I need to get a bumper sticker or two.

    --
    DMCA, Hollings, Palladium. What might have sounded like paranoia is now common sense.
  65. Re:The Age of Aggressive Microsoft Bashing is Upon by eyegor · · Score: 2

    My point was that the only way they could get money from Linux users was to make a version of Office available. Most Linux users don't NEED office. Not with so many decent, albeit somewhat unpolished work-alike packages available.

    That being said, I also find it unlikely that it will happen anytime soon. Some corporations may find it attractive to purchase MS Office if they wanted a higher degree of compatibility with already fielded windows-based systems. It would certainly be a way for MS to gain a degree of credibility/respectability (even though many, if not most, Linux users will recoil in disgust if it were suggested they install Office on their boxes).

    As Open Office and StarOffice become better known, they will make it less profitable for Microsoft to enter that market.

    --

    Don't anthropomorphize computers, they don't like it.
  66. Sneaking in the $ by truthsearch · · Score: 2

    Wow, that's a good point. The users in my company only see the standard office apps plus our custom apps. We know what to expect as output, so I hadn't thought about the little things that might pop up like documentation or stuff sys admins might come across.

    That's something for distro makers to think about. Maybe they should take a hard look at things like that to keep it looking professional.

  67. Gates took the baseball bat to DELL by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2

    If Dell on their own account wanted to drop linux, then it would be absolutely stupid for a Chairman of the Board to make the sales call.

    And, in fact it was stupid for Gates and Ballmer to stick their ugly heads into the DELL deal.

    Period.

    If it was not necessary as some ignorant people would like to think, then it was stupid for them to get involved.

    If it was necesssary (according to them), then it was stupid for them to get involved.

    Suggesting a false reality where the goons with the bats went out unnecessarily is a bit silly.

    --
    NexuSys - Linux support by the best
    1. Re:Gates took the baseball bat to DELL by zangdesign · · Score: 2

      Lewis - you lost me. What was the original point of your post? To suggest that Linux distributor sue Microsoft or the hardware distributors?

      Either way, I fail to see how that would actually help, since Linux distributors are not kept out of the market. There are a multitude of other channels by which a consumer can obtain a Linux-based computer, some of whom even use reverse-discrimination by not selling Microsoft-powered machines. If the Linux distributors have a valid lawsuit against Microsoft, then in turn Microsoft has a valid lawsuit against Penguin, since they are being kept out Penguin's market. Guess who could afford to win that one?

      I think all those years of lawyering have gone to your head and made you lawsuit-happy, but that is my opinion, and I could be wrong. Worse things have happened.

      --
      To celebrate the occasion of my 1000th post, I will post no more forever on Slashdot. Goodbye.
    2. Re:Gates took the baseball bat to DELL by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2

      The point is that when you have a monopoly you are held to the antitrust laws.

      If you do not have a monopoly, then they do not apply to you.

      And, "no" the conduct acceptable for legal practices is NOT the same.

      The antitrust laws were specially written to disadvantage those who hold a monopoly. Why? Because monopolies have so many advantages that they take full value from and those that do not are left out. That is why.

      If you disagree that monopolies should be disadvantaged, that is fine. But, Congress has decided over a hundred years ago that it should be the case.

      Does that mean you should be required to purchase from a competitor versus a monopolist? No, of course not.

      If you read the remedies proposed by the States in the current litigation, absolutely nothing prevents Microsoft from competing on price, quality or terms. Everything proposed only permits others to also market their products without illegal interference or restriction.

      And if you are a consumer you can not possible argue with having alternatives.

      Nobody is going to force you to buy linux, Star Office, Mandrake, OpenOffice, Opera or a Sun compliant JVM with your OS. Microsoft might. And, Microsoft might be required to force you to buy a Sun compliant JVM. But, Mandrake will not. And, Redhat will not. And, Xandros will not. And, Lindows will not. And, SUSE will not. And, each of the UnitedLinux vendors will not.

      Microsoft on the other hand intends to screw you.

      Unless the courts prevent it.

      --
      NexuSys - Linux support by the best
  68. Re:RTFM -- you have to learn the language first by Reziac · · Score: 2

    To a new user, that HOWTO is in a foreign tongue, which he will NOT understand until a human translates it for him. The best way to help him is to go thru the HOWTO with him, making sure he understands what he's reading. Then he'll not only start to learn the language (and maybe have some success on his own next time he has to consult a HOWTO), he'll think linux dudes are the greatest guys on earth, instead of a bunch of elitist assholes.

    Or did you just magically grok linuxese the first time you heard it spoken??

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  69. Re:The Age of Aggressive Microsoft Bashing is Upon by Reziac · · Score: 2

    So you're saying if there was a M$Office that ran seamlessly on linux, M$ would "support" linux for selling more copies of Office for them, just as they "support" Apple?

    Maybe, if this were all there was to it.

    But the truly big bucks are in server and enterprise sales and licensing, and every server that runs linux is seen as money being taken out of M$'s pocket. I don't think M$ gives a damn about, or even notices that linux *users* exist; it's those pesky linux servers they want to replace.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  70. EradicateWindowsNow.com by Micah · · Score: 2

    I agree with the article, and just last week worked on a new site to, uh, "encourage" people to switch away from Windows, whether it be to Linux or MacOS X. It has a FAQ, link list, articles, and a directory of consultants who can help with the transition -- all of which could use additions. ;)

    Check it out!

  71. Advocate to the REAL right people by Reziac · · Score: 2

    You want to advocate to the right people? Then you're correct, it's not the 0.24% of users who run linux on the desktop (per various webserver stats posted HERE by *NIX sysadmin types) who you should be advocating to. (See also my other post today, re impact of desktops vs servers in the real market.)

    You should be advocating to the enterprise level business with the linux server that runs their commerce site, even tho company president hasn't a clue what runs it. He needs to know how much money and downtime that linux server is saving him, or better yet, how much money it is MAKING the company just by being reliable. He needs to know that political machinations (frex, Palladium) will REDUCE PROFITS because they'll negatively impact the company's ability to expand its commerce site (the one that's running on a linux server, remember?)

    Once you get the attention of the suit who has the clout to dictate what OS the company uses on its server, then you've got the attention of someone who matters in the business world; someone who probably makes political contributions and may even have his own lobbyist in Congress.

    Grassroots won't cut it here. If it could, 10 years of linux would already have accomplished everything the "advocacy" push hopes to achieve. You've got to get the attention of movers and shakers in the business world, who when it comes down to it have the REAL say in what products live or die.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  72. they do? perhaps so by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2

    They do?

    I do not recall seeing MS(tm) or MS(r) anyplace. But, they could get a trademark for MS and just not use it much or at all.

    I guess that would make Ms Pacman a Microsoft product? Just thought I would ask.

    --
    NexuSys - Linux support by the best
  73. Make training videos by for(;;); · · Score: 2

    Ever see those ads on UPN and Fox and such for video introductions to desktop computers? Users pop in a CD and it autoplays an introduction to the mouse, word processing, basic configuration. (Those video introductions cost money and are windows-only, of course.)

    Get a cheap camera and make a series of video lectures for as much free software as you can. Start off with the absolute basics (this is a mouse, this is a monitor). This will make Linux an easier-to-start-with platform than windows (unless you pay for a windows class.) Move up to more complex things. GPL (or whatever) the videos and distribute them. If and when this catches on, developers will start habitually including these video lectures as an introductory overview of their software's documentation. Linux will gain desktop share. Users will get nice hand-holding. Manna will rain.

    --

    "Whatever happened to fair use?"
    -- Duff-Man
  74. Re:Trying to make it look hard doesn't help by kigrwik · · Score: 2

    Ah, I knew that there was a better way !

    However, what is the right globbing for "/bin /sbin /usr/bin /usr/sbin" ? I've tried some nasty things with zsh, but nothing really good. And non portable, it seemed.

    <lame defense>
    But your stuff is much more readable, so my half-joke for the original poster would be lost ! :)
    </lame defense>

    --
    -- don't discount flying pigs until you have good air defense
  75. This assumes that Linux is what we want by Junks+Jerzey · · Score: 2

    I'm not all that fond of Windows. It's gotten too bulky and impossible to understand, both from a user's and programmer's perspective. Linux, to me, is more of the same. It's simpler, yes, but this reminds me of a good quote from Larry O'Brien:

    "Claiming Java is easier than C++ is like saying that K2 is shorter than Everest."

    I write video games for a living. I know a lot of people don't want to believe it, but writing code to display windows and such is trivial. It really is. You could spent a month trying to figure out how to do things with Gtk or the Windows API or some other toolkit, or you could write code to do all of the same stuff *without* an underlying library in 25% of the time. But so-called modern operating systems rely on people thinking all that stuff is really hard to do and that we need giant APIs to dealt with it.

    What I really want is something lean and mean, something like a 1GHz palmtop with lean hooks to a 3D card. It's pretty appalling when you realize that a *driver* for a modern video card is so large that you couldn't even fit it in a 32MB game console. And then you see Grand Theft Auto 3 running on such a console...

    I know, I know, this isn't going to go over well. What I really want, so to speak, is a modern Commodore 64 or Atari 800. Something that isn't just layers of complexity upon layers of complexity. This is within reach.

    What I don't want is to be part of some angst-ridden geek club, fighting over which bloated OS is better than another.

  76. Re:TeamOS/2 by os2fan · · Score: 2
    Team OS/2 went down bad because for reasons other than the team. It still runs.

    It was the first real mainstream hacker group to come in major contact wit Windows, largely because, unlike Amiga and Apple, OS/2 runs on the same hardware as Windows, and many OS/2 users were fairly familiar with Windows as well.

    Unlike Linux, the thing is more dependant on the whims of the vendor - IBM. None the same, the world (even the Windows world) is better for OS/2 and teamOS/2.

    On the other hand, there was no "TeamBe" that I saw.

    Linux zealots does well to learn the way some of the more aggressive OS/2 zealots behave, if only to avoid this issue.

    --
    OS/2 - because choice is a terrible thing to waste.
  77. Re:they do? perhaps so by nathanm · · Score: 2
    Here is some text from the inside cover of an old Win95 manual verbatim (emphasis added):
    Microsoft, DriveSpace, MS, MS-DOS, Windows, Windows NT, and the Windows Logo are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries.
    About Ms Pacman; as a lawyer, you should know better. Trademarks only apply in a specific industry or line of work. Arcade games and PC software were worlds apart when "Ms Pacman" and "MS" were first used. I hope you've heard of the Apple Records vs Apple Computer trademark dispute.
  78. Re:they do? perhaps so by Lewis+Mettler,+Esq. · · Score: 2

    I accept your text from the manual as being accurate.

    However, computer games and computer software may or may not be in different industries. The true test is whether the consumer would be confused. (That is why Apple Records and Apple Computer do not present a problem.) To be honest I doubt anyone thinks Ms Pacman is put out by Microsoft but they are a software and game company and that fits within the products that Microsoft does in fact produce. "MS Windows" sound familiar? Of course, the text you quoted did not include MS Windows but I think it also is a trademark.

    So we have:

    MS Windows (by Microsoft).
    MS Office (by Microsoft)
    Ms Pacman (who knows)
    MS Flight Simulator (by Microsoft)

    MS does not make a very good trademark at all.

    The other observation to be made is that Microsoft is about to lose its "windows" trademark. Maybe it already has for all practical purposes.

    But, of course the original issue of this thread is whether you can use a trademark in your comments. And, the answer is that you can. And, as long as you tell the truth there is no liable liability associated with its use in that way. If you give false information (such as FUD, etc) then you can be guilty of product defamation or degredation. In other words, you can bad mouth a product using that products trademark but you are only in the clear if you tell the truth.

    In other words, false statements can have legal consequences. But, that would be true whether or not you used the precise trademark held by the company.

    --
    NexuSys - Linux support by the best
  79. You are short sited by Eric+Damron · · Score: 2

    this has little to do with idealism, (bucko). It has been shown time and time again that once locked into a Microsoft solution, Micro$oft turns the screws with unreasonable licensing agreements, costly updates that you must purchase because you are, after all, locked into there non-standard compliant software.

    And BTW, whom are you calling a kid? I'm a professional in the computer software industry with over 20 years experience. I would guess that I have a much better understanding of the way things really are than most. Much better than your short sited view. Sure, It may be tough dumping Microsoft for a while but the benefits of using open source software that you know will follow open standards is undeniable and worth it.

    --
    The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
  80. Help resolve Mozilla bugs by Sits · · Score: 2

    You don't need to be a technical wizz to be able to do this. All you need to do is download the latest version of Mozilla and see if you can reproduce other people's bugs so that the developers know that their time won't be wasted on non-issues and ensure that real problems are looked at in a timely fashion.

    More information in the kill-unco FAQ.