Slashdot Mirror
Why PHBs Fear Linux
Tin Foil Hat writes "Paul Murphy over at LinuxInsider examines the role IT text books play in business school curriculums and the misconceptions and misinformation that they present to students. If you've ever wondered why your PHB just doesn't get it when it comes to UNIX and Linux, this article is for you."
No, but I DO wonder what a PHB is. Not everyone speaks in acronyms.
"When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
He read in Windows Magazine that it was bad.
" If you've ever wondered why your PHB just doesn't get it when it comes to UNIX and Linux, this article is for you."
Maybe they don't get it because they don't see Linux software on store shelves at Best Buy. Maybe they feel that using Linux would be a huge headache since they have NFI where the software actually comes from. It's percieved as some toy OS.
"Derp de derp."
They can't afford the SCO License Fee
http://www.beyourowneviloverlord.tk
http://www.frozenchickenthrowing.tk
http://www.killercamel.tk
Our company builds software systems on linux, so our PHB's are very in tune and understand linux's advantages.
100% Insightful
So when you remark "My PHB is a clueless, drooling half-wit." it's really a case of nuture over nature?
It's a dilbert reference, it means Pointy Haired Boss.
I can count to 1023 on my hands. Ask me about #132.
I don't know why this is the case, but it really must affect the bias of so many students (and future PHBs). I suppose its a matter of people using what they know and what they expect the readers will be using that makes them decide to take this slant, but still seems to be a bad approach in the long-run.
Paul Lenhart writes words!
PHB = Pointy Haired Boss. This is a Dilbert reference. Dilbert's boss' hair is just in two little horns. PHB has come to mean any boss that is generally arbitrary, ignorant, and demanding, just like Dilbert's.
But there is another kind of evil that we must fear most... and that is the indifference of good men.
I think a lot of people just don't know what *nix is. Of course, textbooks like these don't help. Hell I'm in my senior year of a CS BS course of study, and there are students in my classes who couldn't use a terminal to save their lives or work remotely without a GUI. They just don't understand the system commands.
Sad
Sig* sig = theOneSig();
My PHB says it's too hard to install printers
"If you think you have things under control, you're not going fast enough." --Mario Andretti
It is always easy for a person who dislikes a platform to make it look bad and point out why it is bad. Text Books are no exception an author who doesn't particular care for an OS even though they are try to objective, will often get their feelings about it in some way or another either by ignoring the fact, giving negative examples, or use negativity resining to explain the features of an other product, "Example: Linux was designed in part because of the shortcomings in windows." While I don't say that Windows is Bad it is implied that Linux is better then windows, Implying that windows sucks. So I probably is best is to concentrate on your platforms strong points and not on its opponents week points, Thus saving yourself from a flame war with your boss. What works best for me is that I compare OS's to Tools Windows is a Hammer and Linux is like a screw driver. They do essentially the same thing put a piece of metal in wood. But they do it differently and having different tradeoffs. Most bosses can understand tradeoffs vs. Better and Worse because with better and worse flame wars occure when speaking about Tradeoffs then it seems much more level headed.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
... because Linux-users call them PHBs!
excerpt - - O'Brien's book is only about 530 pages, plus some appendices. Unix doesn't rate an index entry at all, but Linux gets three. Two of those point to an extract on page 153 from a BusinessWeek article in which the authors have this to say about Linux: "Linux is good at serving up Web pages, but it isn't as effective as Windows 2000 at handling more complex jobs." Very nice. My PHB must have this one.
If they are in tune and understand linux, they're not TRUE PHBs now, are they? : )
i thought fear was in the eye of the beholder.
...doesn't "get it" when it comes to Linux, then he isn't going ot get "IT" full stop. And most PHB's don't.
Because they are afraid to "get into" anything that his/her competitors do noy use or understand. PHB's can only compare what they know or what others have, they have no idea what else there is. So, basically is all FEAR.
The article does a good job of picking the misleading and false statements about Unix and Linux in various leading textbooks.
And these are just the vague and false statements about one particular category of knowledge - the Linux OS. It begs the question: if they can be mistaken about this area and not taken the time to get their facts straight, what other areas are getting hand-waving instead of well-researched facts?
More than anything else, this points out some embarrassing shortcomings in these textbooks. Professors picking textbooks for their students would do well to pick better ones than these.
"Provided by the management for your protection."
They have stock in Microsoft.
Karma whorin' since 1999
Expect this to change now that IBM and Novell have to IT world all a-buzz. People are already being sent to Linux training (by their employers) in droves in my area.
Why PHBs Fear Linux
Maybe one should consider that the people who write the checks notice they are frequently called "PHBs" by people who love Linux.
5 cents please.
Imagine how much harder physics would be if electrons had feelings! -Feynman, maybe
It used to be political regimes that adultered the curriculums with indoctrination, nowdays, like everything else, it has become a business!
Fortunately there a growing number of Maverick enterprises, in all sectors, that are learing that success comes best by not following the rules. I guess that is what the lawyers are supposed to prevent;-)
And if you thought that was boring you obviously havn't read my Journal ;-)
Eeee, could it be because you don't get kickbacks when somethings free??
(Runs, ducks for cover!!)
Mod +5 Drunk
I was once told by an MBA that in order for my consulting services to be valued more, I should raise my rates. People automatically think that they get what they pay for, therefor a free distro can't be worth as much as an XP or Solaris license.
To err is human. To arr is pirate.
who invented the PHB. One company I use to work for got rid of them, because they seem to drain the productivity of slaves, i mean workers. That place also worked as a democracy where people chose to use linux or continue to use windows. Ironically they went with macs and OS X, openoffice. The only people who really needed windows were the accounts dept.
My PHB is so afraid of change ...
He had me wipe XP and install 98 on his corporate controlled pc, just so he didn't have to relearn the interface.
Linux to a boss just means change, and change is BAD.
I received an email at our lug webmaster account asking for help with some questions about Linux from an MIS student. Here are the questions that her instructor had given them to research and answer:
1.What is Linux and who created it?
2.Why was it released into the public domain rather than copyrighted?
3. Is it possible to copyright anything that relates to Linux? If so, in what way?
I gave *long* answers, showed examples of copyright statements from the Linux source, explained that everybody who contributes to it, such as Linus or IBM, keep copyright, etc. I really wanted to meet her clueless instructor, but, maybe next time.
Keep in mind that these guys were pushing cobol up until about 3 years ago, so they probably think it's extremely cutting edge to push windows nt.
Do you have ESP?
What about my DMG? Are we talking 3.0 or 3.5?
01100101 01111001 01100101 01100010 01101001 01110100 01100101 01110010
Wow- 4 huge banner ads and 4 in the text. THG watch out! ;)
Never have I once come across a mention of Microsoft (except maybe in the History section (Xenix)) any any of the classic books by Tanenbaum, Stevens, et al.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
However, I'll be the first to admit that most of the MIS-related courses gave only sparse mention of Linux. I think students in general are aware of Linux's existence, but little more than that. Were it up to them to make a platform decision after the basic business degree program, I'm sure that most students would sadly be grossly uninformed about Linux and OSS, and therefore drift over to the familiar Windows environments.
Could it be that many PHB's fear the penguin because of the illogical, emotionally-based arguments so many Linux zealots constantly use to push their agenda? I mean, many of the nutcases I've heard from speak of Linux like the coming of some New World Order, reminiscent of how Communists pitched their ideas back during the fifties. PHB's take one look at people like that and say "there's no way in hell I'm going to trust someone so emotionally involved in this to make a valid business decision."
There have been an increasing number of articles, posts, and so forth coming from notable people in the Linux community pointing out how the zealotry is really becoming a serious impediment to further Linux progress. In particular, they cite many Linux zealot's inability to take any sort of constructive criticism and their steadfast belief that the users should conform to the OS instead of the other way around. They say this is bad for Linux, and I think they're right on.
Microsoft is using this irrational zealot behavior to convince more PHB's that Linux is some kind of cult, not just an operating system. The more outspoken the zealots are, the more they hurt things.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
I work for a major defense contractor, where I've been integrating systems for numerous years. One of the primary reasons we don't do LINUX is because there's no profit in it for us. If we integrate a Sun, SGI, PC, etc., we get to tack on our 10% to the OS costs...and yes, I do believe this is a huge waste of taxpayer money, but that's how it's done. You can't make a profit by saving the govt. money.
Just another day in Paradise
...and while I haven't read them all, I find that their treatment of OSes is very general indeed. They talk more about computer systems and networks, and the foundations of these, than they do about which OS is good or bad and what's different about them. In the book I read, an OS comparison showed about 7-8 OSes, including Windows, Mac and Linux, and also had a case study about switching to Linux. (Note that the article doesn't really say that MS Windows is mentioned *so much more* than Linux, just that Linux is not mentioned often.)
This article, IMHO, doesn't really show the reality that 1) Linux even 5 years ago was merely a speck in most people's minds, 2) that Unix does have its downsides, and that 3) the authors of these books are probably running Windows as their native OS! This hardly adds up to the kind of bias the article suggests.
2-3 years from now you will start to see Linux information trickle down into these books, as they publish new versions. A couple may retain a "bias", but I bet that most will realistically track what has changed in the marketplace since the previous version of their book. To expect that formal education moves at the same speed as economic developments is silly. Education moves much more slowly, and it's got nothing to do with bias.
I guess Windows 2000 doesn't allow file serving and multi-tasking, that's more secure.
I felt physically ill reading this article. At least Tanenbaum is gracious in his latest version of his OS text book to Linux and other *nixes.
The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com
The biggest difference between Linux and Windows that I see is that with Windows I can find support staff who understand they work for me to help me achieve my business goals.
With Linux, I can only find elitist "enginners" who can't figure out why I would stand in the way of their grand vision for my company.
I work for a Fortune 100 telecom company who isn't terribly pro-linux. But one day I counted up all the open-sourced software we use on a daily basis, there's a ton of it... if someone ripped OSS software away from us, we'd be in a world of hurt.
Heard in a Data Structures class:
"Linux? Oh, I don't use that, I don't own a Macintosh."
If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions.
I was once told by an MBA that in order for my consulting services to be valued more, I should raise my rates. People automatically think that they get what they pay for, therefor a free distro can't be worth as much as an XP or Solaris license.
:)
I agree, and there's more to it than that:
Consider Godiva chocolates. I've read studies that state that blind taste tests cannot rate them higher than Russell-Stover chocolates, a much less expensive chocolate. The reason why Godiva exists is because people want to pay more for chocolate. It's part of a high-class lifestyle. They need to feel high-class, and they need to fit in with their high-class friends. This same phenomenon is true with many other products. Just replace "high-class" with "cool", and you'll see what had fueled the sale of Nike shoes for years.
I'm not interested in using products to make me feel like I'm better or, or in using products to impress my friends. I am, however, interested in selling products to people who feel that way. It seems to me that the seller is in the much more intelligent position than the buyer.
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
Some people are freaked out by the notion that Linux's source code is "open", and, as such, don't understand how it could possibly be a secure platform if all of its workings can be easily seen. Yeah, I know, it's wrong, but that's what a lot of people think. A lot of people think something freely available like Linux can't possibly be secure.
Our CIO is a sharp guy, understands that Linux is the appropriate technical answer to several of the problems we have, and understands the value of open-source software in genereal. The problem is, we got _the letter_, and he's understadably not interested in becoming a headline-making company for the wrong reasons. It's annoying and frustrating, but until SCO gets slapped down hard and goes away, we have to consider the legal/political aspect as well as the technical merits. Yes, it's BS. Yes, their claims are worthless, but yes, he has chosen not to put us at risk as a target of SCO. He expressed the same frustration that we techies are feeling.
If SCO is just a shill for Microsoft, and is trying to delay the inevitable slide away from Windows, well, in our case, it's having some of that effect. If they're not doing this as an agent of Microsoft, well, it has the same effect.
seems to be a phb
"Want to know why most business analysts and venture capitalists simply don't get it with respect to Unix? Take a look at the computer books they study while working toward their MBA, financial analysis certificate or accounting designation, and you'll understand that their ignorance isn't entirely their fault."
This is the first paragraph of the article. Now think about this. Basically what it says is that whatever the system (in this case educational institutions) feed them, that is what they believe. It is very sad to see that many professionals in fact do not spend the time to learn about their field outside of what is fed to them in the classroom. Their educational diet is pretty bad. If one really wants to know everything one can about a particular field, then one should take the time to read that which lies outside of the institution where they are learning it. Btw, this also shows how corporations are integrated with the education system. Never trust just one source for all your facts.
True, it isn't entirely the fault of the student, but what do we do about it? One idea comes to mind, find more sources for information besides just a book your school was encouraged to buy.
There is hope though. Linux is one very powerful example of how the internet has changed the way we find information and work together on common goals.
Question everything.
Are books even adequate? During my years as a student of Computer Science (high school and college) I always found that the information in textbooks was outdated, even if it had *ever* been accurate. Even now, every time I buy a programming book I find that a more recent version has been released with new functionality that is not covered in the book.
IT moves so quickly that by the time the information makes it to print, new information is available elsewhere. Because of the static nature of books, they only get less informative over time. These professors should encourage their students to use online resources that are updated regularly, or journals that are published faster and more frequently than books, if they want to be on the cutting-edge.
If you've ever wondered why your PHB just doesn't get it when it comes to UNIX and Linux, this article is for you
Hmm ... PHBs are retarded. Yet they don't use Linux. I don't get it ... I thought the two went hand in hand.
/flamebate.but.a.good.one
This is the one I've been told by my boss (although he does exagerate a bit...):
Linux is a melting pot of unfinished softwares branded by zealots with way too much time on their hands and a very bad understanding of business practices.
Noteworthy: he does run the inventory servers on Linux, his opinions was forged after having to maintain said servers, he also mentionned that this "free" alternative cost him over 20 000$ in freelance maintenance personnel per year after he decided he wasn't up to the task of maintaining them.
I cannot really blame him for his opinions since he has at least tried, for real.
MS ia a publicly traded company.
MS has a large share of the consumer and business market.
MS has a business plan, sells multiple products and services and posts a profit every quarter. Moreover, they produce regular financial results, results and filings.
MS has been in business for several years.
MS has many employess in several countries.
MS has numerous stockholders and anaylysts understand what MS is trying to accomplish as a business.
MS is run by the wealthiest man in the US - (so many people correlate this as an indicator of "how good their products are" - go figure).
From a business school perpective, these things are relevant.
When Linux is brought up, it is often ambiguous to understand how the distributions and linux-baseed software companies plan to make money ("If its free and the code is publicly available, how can you make money?"). Also, it is hard to relate "the open source community" into dollars and cents.
Mind you, this is not neccessarily my opinion, just an observation of those whose opinion's validate the article's report.
I think he pretty identified the primary reason Linux has been slow to catch on in mainstream business.
It's all fun having a bunch of geeks get together and talk about how great Howard Dean is and how c00| Linux is; but we're still very nieve when it comes to educating the decision makers in the world. I'd love to seem some discussion about how to get Linux written up in more business textbooks. I would have thought the RHAT IPO and IBM would have helped this; but wow that article showed that misconsceptions still abound.
Let me share some thoughts
1. PHBs dont' give a damm about linux/windows/apple.
2. PHBs tend to have little more going through their head like getting the payroll running for the next month which pays for your cool toys
3. PHBs understand very well how to play with your psychology and depress you or make you happy like a little puppet.
So, think twice.
- People who believe other people have no right to live, got no right to live ...
But what's the excuse for this?
OH NO! FILE SHARING? WE'D BETTER GO BACK TO DOS!Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
My mum is an IT manager over a Hospital conglomerate. She asked me the other day how to use her floppy drive. Not jokeing here and its damn sad. Did she have her mind melted by evil Orwellian Documentations? NO! Her educational background is a 2-year beautician's degree. The next time your PHB gives you shit - think about my mum. Feel better?
PHB have no clue about it because it isn't offered as standard by the major PC makers. If when you were buying a PC and you forgot to tell them to ship Windows XP they by default shipped SuSE or Mandrake then maybe they might know what it is.
Now at the Best Buy it's not that Linux is missing from the shelves. It's that applications that Run on Linux are missing on the shelves. Give me Quickbooks, OfficeXP, or Adobe with little "for Linux" stickers on them and we might get noticed.
Most PHBs don't even know what an OS is. I've had plenty of well educated people, when I ask them, "What OS do you run?" tell me Word. They know on some level that they run Windows but they are clueless about what it really is. They just hear the name and they parrot that. Word, Windows, whatever...
Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.
and you don't extensively cover OSS, the most significant movement in computing today..if you don't cover linux, which effectively runs the web, you're not doing your job. End of story.
But there is another kind of evil that we must fear most... and that is the indifference of good men.
I was working for a small web dev firm in the late 90's and it was an exclusive MS shop. The reason? The technology manager (who ran IT and the programmers) owned stock in MS. In addition, he also was one of the owners of the small web development company. Can you say:
1) Conflict of interest
and
2) Lack of professionalism?
I didn't last long there...
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
a PHB is a manager who is all about protecting his own turf and cannot accept change in any guise. So, by definition a PHB would reject Linux. If he accepted Linux, he wouldn't be a PHB.
With Microsoft running on over 90% of the computers used today, yes, textbooks will be a bit Microsoft-centric...that's just common sense. Want to make things fair? Take the *nix market share, then devote that much time in class to it.
slashdot, news for crazed liberal socialist zealots
You're aware that you can purchase commercial distributions of Linux that are quite pricy, right? Something like Red Hat's high end server product, Red Hat Enterprise Linux Advanced Server starts at $1500, for example. I'm reasonably sure you can find a Linux distributor that will be happy to do business with you if your primary requirement is high cost.
May we never see th
i teach high school history. from many of text books, you would think that the US is the greatest perpetrator of evil in the world. or at least, no better than most other nations. (okay slash trolls, flame on)
textbooks are notoriously bad, for the most part. textbook publishers have to sell textbooks and there are a whole range of issues they have to deal with. i was a member of the textbook adoption committee a few years ago and i had the privilege (?) of speaking with a few of the reps. holy crap!! it should be no different i IT. the people who have the loudest voices (i.e. political groups who squak about "representation") or the most money (corporations that need product placement), get their voices heard the loudest. it is disgusting, which is why i use the text for very little of the class.
here's a blatant example of the 10th grade Mod Civ book. Hitler and the holocaust get an entire section in the WW2 chapter, yet the multiple 10's of millions Stalin killed gets 2 sentences. hmmm...
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
How many times is Windows mentioned in these books? Our author does not include this in the article so if were making comparisons lets at least know the other side.
Traditionally Unix and Linux have bastions in CompSci departments and MIS departments have skewed to the Windows world. Microsoft has heavily infuenced US business schools with low priced licensing and faculty sponsored research, Linux does not have this advantage. Alos, I would mention that Linux+Unices only have 8% of the marketplace while Windows occupies 85% therefore if Linux/Unix have 3 references and you see more then 30 references for Windows then it really is out of whack with reality.
Outside of Slashdot and in the real world, Linux is a minority group, (not to say it will always be that way) and therefore will have less coverage because of it. (I am a fan of Trance music but I do not complain that my local Best Buy does carry the kind of selection I can get in a Miami independent record store devoted to Trance/Dance music). The store and also the author of these books are playing to the largest segment of the population. I would take a guess that more people know how to manipulate digital pictures on a computer then know how to use a Unix-based system.
Finally, university textbooks are NOTORIOUS for being behind the curve when it comes to new developments in fields so you can't really fault the books for being behind the times when it comes to Linux, it is only since 1999-2000 that Linux began to get real traction in the marketplace.
I guess what I am getting at is that maybe we shouldn't teach them anything about IT or programming. Maybe we should teach them how to be humble enough to ask for advice from those of us who know that stuff, instead of pretending they know everything? I know we can be just as biased, but lets say you have a few knowledgeable employees, ask them all and make your best decision from that. I don't know how to manage others or run a business, I wouldn't try without getting input from someone who does first, why should they?
I think it is because Microsoft equals money in more way than one.
Most *nix software is free. Most software for MS products isn't, and this includes top notch applications which are worth it, and stupid applications (ie, most shareware).
I think that people who advocate MS products, also think that they can make money on it in one way or another. They can write stupid shareware apps, or they can write another book for an already crowded market.
(S(SKK)(SKK))(S(SKK)(SKK))
Take for example the requirements that the how the publishers revise textbooks with such high frequency that it forces students to buy new copies instead of using a used copy of an older edition.
The publishers first priority is to make money for their shareholders, not educate people. M$'s first priority is to maximize the dollars of profit per share, not provide the best computing solution.
Let me preface this by saying I support Linux as much as anybody, I couldn't make a living without it. BUT, to expect 'normals' to embrace it like those deep in the IT industry do is a tough pill to swallow. The article correctly points out the MS bias in textbooks, but then goes on to decry them for no references to 'Gnome? GNU? GPL? IBM? SuSE? KDE? Minix?'. The average MBA doesn't care. The average person doesn't care. We have an incredible amount of freedom in our world, but with that freedom comes the responsibility of knowing what to choose. What can we say to somebody who doesn't want to learn all we've learned? The price of ability to choose is the alienation of people who don't wish to choose. Some people like being nothing more than a battery floating in a pod of goo.
The Unix/Linux system at my work is a nightmare (Yes we use both). Only certain apps will print on certain printers. Formatting a printed page is nearly impossible. Mounting a CD-Rom requires an IT person and 2 days notice. When the engineers need a picture from a finite element tool they use Exceed to login to Unix from a PC and then take a screenshot. Then we trim the edges and stick it into Word so we can print it. License Servers are always going off line and every afternoon the Unix server bogs down to a crawl. These are just a few of the problems that we literally have on a daily basis.
I've seen well run Unix systems, we just don't have one. As long as poorly run Unix/Linus systems are out there inhibiting work flow the OS will always have its opponents.
Sorry to be blunt, feel free to flame me (I am an anonymous coward for a reason)
I took an 11 week course (we are on quarters) in Management of Information Systems. During the entire 11 week period my proffesor constantly damned the "cathederal approach to software engineering" we refer to as Linux (the book coined the term). His arguement was that it is not easy to use, it is not guarenteed to continue into the future, and there is no one to be held accountable for failures or for fixes.
That being said, he refused to take a copy of knoppix, refused to play with it when I loaded it for him on the school's computer, and refused to believe that I wasn't playing a trick on him. Because he was the boss of the class and was handing out the grades, I was only able to convience one member of the class on the possibilities of class.
Oh yeah, the prof was a teacher at Northwestern and at DePaul. Yeesh.....
Victory is gained, not in knowing your opponents next move, but in preempting them.
* It's not on store shelves at Best Buy.
* The Microsoft monopoly has brainwashed people.
* People will refuse to use anything other than what they know.
* They own stock in Microsoft.
* They're scared of SCO license fees.
Maybe, just maybe, people happen to prefer Windows in many instances. Maybe they really do view Linux as a cobbled-together OS made by volunteers.
ARe you kidding? Everyone knows that Linux is a hacker Operating System. They also know that hackers break into your computer over the phone line and steal your credit card information! Crackers are just what you put cheese on...
/sarcasm
Ignorance:1
Knowledge:0
I don't remember any discussion about specific operating systems except for my operating systems class and we talked about several (though they focused on *shudder* Minix). What textbooks did they use?
I have a friend of mine earning a MS in MIS in the chicago land area. He has spent loads of time on Windows, VB, etc. He is now writing his thesis (or some major paper) on installing RockLinux on several systems and getting the clustering going. Then he is suppose to teach his advisor/current instructor on Linux on how to do it.
Far too many ppl who can't, are busy teaching what (or perhaps how) little they know.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Correction: -10 PHB material.
Pretty Hot Babe
Pipe-wielding Hoard of Baboons
Pierced Head Banger
Packed Hand Brush
Pickled Hypothalamus Borsht
Oh, there are so many more! Somebody Please put a Head in my Bullet!
Fortunately, I went to a school where we were expected to learn how to work without a GUI environment. The idea was that it's a lot easier to learn to go from a non-GUI environment to a GUI than the other way around.
Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
Professors are often pretty ignorant as well. It really depends on where you go though. At Kansas State the intro CS course is taught by a flaming moron and another one of the required courses is likewise taught by a total idiot. These are people who explicitly lack clue and have no knowledge of the non-Microsoft world. If they do (and should considering they likely got at least their Bachelors working with Unix), they certainly never act like it.
Those with clue though tend to at least deal with everything equally. The network course deals primarily with Unix, but doesn't discriminate and spends at least some time dealing with Windows. As well most programs are written in Java (practically all they teach) or accepted if compiled under Linux.
Technology is the new 'muscle car' of our culture. Back in the day, if you couldn't talk carburetors and rear-end differentials, you weren't cool, you were the loser, you never got laid, etc. Since the Internet boom, it's become cool, a sign of 'being with the times', of not being a dinosaur, if you "know computers". Aging PHBs fear the new breed of young PHBs who at least speak the lingo (and some might actually know what they're doing).
Thus, exposing a PHB's ignorance of a new technology is the easiest way to get on his bad side. The Emperor Has No Clothes.
During a huge staff meeting, our bald PHB kept mentioning "Sesus Linux" and how "SCO stole code from Sesus and gave it to IBM", citing these as reasons to avoid putting Linux on our mainframe.
Linux, because it tends to attract the bearded longhair crowd, is even MORE repellent to the aging PHB, someone who grew up with the notion that if you wear a white shirt and went to a good school, then you'd always have a job.
I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
MOD THE PHB STUFF OFFTOPIC so the discussion of the article itself is visible!
I think they mean the "feature" that Windows won't let you read a file which is opened for writing OR READING by another process. This is Microsoft's idea of a security framework apparently. Things like permissions and ACLs certainly aren't security features, no, they are PROBLEMS. Repeat after Bill: Broken multi-user semantics are a feature, not a bug.
1) How Stupid Are PHBs? We'll Show You!!!
2) Of Course Eunuchs Offer Better Security!
3) In PHB Language: Adoi Duh Uhhhh Umm...drooool
4) Y winbloze lusers ph33r 1337 1i|\|u>
5) Profit!
maybe im just stupid, but what the hell is a PHB?
I've never EVER had a PHB who didn't understand that UNIX was a leading class/enterprise-ready/solid/stable platform. What crack-smoking companies do you work for? UNIX invented the enterprise network OS.
Linux on the other hand...
I'm currently a student worker at a fairly well known University Library on the east coast of the US. Our facilities here use absolutely no Unix or GNU/Linux solutions - everything is windows based. When I first started working three years ago, I asked one other "higher-ups" why they didn't utilize Unix or GNU/Linux for their webservers, fileservers, or other IT services. I was told that, "Linux is all nice and fun to play around with but in the real world you have to use Windows". Needless to say my stomach churned a little bit after hearing that gem of a statement. Upon further inquiry from my supervisors and boss, it seems that 99% of this non-usage is due to bad-publicity about the true abilities of a Linux system and they also believe that the complexity curve would be far too great for them to successfully impliment such a radical change.
If textbooks had focused more on GNU/Linux and Unix besides only windows, I'm sure the layout of our electronic library system would be much different. (I type this as I hear them talking about problems regarding the printservers that run NT and haven't been functioning properly all day).
Taco Bell used to be a lot cheaper than it is now, but despite being the cheapest fast food restaurant in the business, they didn't get in that many customers. It was determined that people weren't eating at Taco Bell because they percieved the low price to be indicitive of low quality. After Taco Bell raised its prices to be more in line with other fast food chains, they increased their market share, because customers percieved the higher price meaning better food.
As for Godiva chocolate, there are certain kinds of Godiva that I don't even like, and I don't think are really very good quality chocolate. I'm a fan of Wilbur Chocolate's plain dark chocolate.
Eagles may soar, but weasles don't get sucked into jet engines...
The main reason CIO's and managers dislike Linux is that there is no entity to wine them and dine them, slip money under the table so that they purchase Microsoft solutions (Windows, Office, Servers, Exchange etc). When Microsoft sales guys take out the managers to sporting events, cultural events, give them lots of freebies, ofcourse they'll accept a Microsoft solution - they've received kickbacks for making the purchasing decision.
Revolution = Evolution
The noted symptoms are indicative of problems in education in general, not necessarily specific to MIS. Keep in mind that it takes a while for a textbook to get written, edited & published. Then it takes time to get it approved for use & curricula to be developed, then you have to wait for the next semester / school year to start. If you were to publish a current, accurate textbook today, you'd be lucky to get it into a classroom before fall 2005. Those students wouldn't likely hit the market until 2007.
Now take a look at the mainstream press & how long it takes them to catch up to whats current in IT. If the journalists that cover this stuff on a daily basis take their sweet time opening their minds to new software / OSes / development styles, etc. how long do you think it will take a textbook publisher, much less a professor?
When I was in college around the beginning of the last decade, the best class I had used business week to drive discussions. It was a great way to get up to speed with the current issues facing business. We were discussing biotech as 'the next big thing'. Note that this was back around the same time that Linus was writing the 1.0 kernel. The 3.5" floppy drive was taking over as a new standard. Internet? WTF is an internet?
If you want to get current information to wet-behind-the-ears MBA/MIS types, you have to figure out how to convince academians that they need to have flexible curricula that changes as fast as technology. Not necessarily follow the bleeding edge, but find a periodical that will cover a wide range of tech issues.
The problem isn't with the textbooks, per se, but with the academic institutions that continue to use old, out of date textbooks - which, in the tech field, any published textbook would be!
9.) They remember a time when Microsoft was on the cutting-edge
8.) They like the convenience of 'one-stop shopping'
7.) Managers get paid to know more than their staff (hence they know more than you do)
6.) Their bosses know even less than they do about this stuff!
5.) Theres' no open source PR movement
4.) 'Nobody ever got fired for choosing Microsoft'
3.) Free software is bad, but free swag is good
2.) Microsoft is the biggest, so they must be the best!
and the top reason why they don't 'get' Linux:
1.) Because they're just not as smart as YOU!
ps, i loved you on Saturday Night Live, IT guy;>
IT's funny since most of the hard core business operations run on either Mainframes (running MVS with UNIX System Services), a commercial UNIX, or Linux/FreeBSD (for slightly smaller apps) etc.
How about a book called: "O'Reilly's Using UNIX/Linux guide for MBAs"
Funny, at work, the senior Oracle DBA is a huge proponent of Solaris and AIX on big machines. He's almost done with his MBA. But then again he used to be a UNIX/AIX System Admin.
Another reason is that Windows is a commercial product. If you sell a product running on Windows, it seems more professional for some reason. Don't ask me why, but that's the way the market works.
It's like... If you've spent a lot of money developing it, it must be a good product.
"One reason Microsoft's software is the de facto standard is because it is available to run on a variety of computer systems. Recognizing the desirability and benefits of interoperability and software portability, Microsoft's Windows products are designed to be used on many computers besides desktop systems (servers, for example). This is not only a wish of Microsoft, but it is also the wish of many IT professionals responsible for developing and supporting enterprise systems."
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
There's no shame in being a pariah. -Marge Simpson
it's strikingly similar to the liberal political bias in "higher education".
students would be served best by an even presentation of the two or three (or more) competing options. unfortunately, many instructors only know what they have read, since they may have little or no real world experience.
explore all options. sometimes Windows does make sense. sometimes Linux does, sometimes Unix does, and sometimes other operating systems do.
.sigs are for post^Hers.
Linux to a boss just means change, and change is BAD.
Incidently, this is something that the OSS world can learn from.
Users *hate* user interface change. If you want to change the internals, add features, fine, great. *Don't* move options around or change the way the task is done. For a typical user, this is a huge problem. It's even worse than software randomly blowing their work away -- then they can say "the computer ate it" to their boss, but if they just can't figure out how to do something on version 4, they're the one that gets chewed out.
OSS is both very good and very bad in this respect.
Windows has kept roughly the same interface and way of working with things. They change their widgets around to use the marketing effect of making people using an old OS have a computer that "looks old", but they keep things working basically the same way for typical users. Plus, you can move from Windows machine A to Windows machine B with no problems (but I'll avoid host-based and application-based consistency issues for the moment and just focus on temporal consistency of a piece of software).
Linux is a lot different.
The first time I put Linux on my computer, the first time I used Linux, was Red Hat Linux 5.2 At that point, the GUI was mostly Tk, Athena, and Motif. Navigator used Motif. GV and a couple of other utilites used Athena. All the system configuration stuff was Tk. The window manager was Afterstep (a hacked up version).
Fast forward to Red Hat 6.0. GNOME 1 was introduced (and *boy*, was it flaky at first). IIRC, the login screen was still xdm. Suddenly, users were expected to use GNOME.
Fast forward to Red Hat 8.0 or so. GNOME 2 became the standard interface. I believe the default window manager moved from Enlightenment to Sawfish at this point.
The next release, Metacity became the standard window manager.
The default web browser changed along the way from Navigator 4 to Mozilla to (IIRC galeon for a bit). It's a good guess that it's going to be FireSomething in the next release. The set of basic software and the way to deal with it changes drastically. Most people that I know of that use UNIX find a comfortable way of dealing with it, and then keep doing so. If they like a terminal or a particular window manager, once they've gotten things the way they like, they stick with things. They know how to configure things in newer distros so that everything works the way they like. The typical user just has this bewildering range of changes coming through. How do they get a new file browser window? How do they change the desktop background? How do they switch between windows from the keyboard? These things can't change.
The *good* news is that Linux is configurable enough to *keep* things working pretty much the same way if users like it that way, given a competent admin.
It drives *me* nuts that MS moved the UI method of changing your password and mucking with the network around, among other things, in several of their OS releases.
May we never see th
From the article: For example if vendor A's product runs on the UNIX operating system and vendor B's runs on Windows NT, vendor A may try to influence the company to view the UNIX platform as a requirement. Simultaneously, vendor B might try to include features that are difficult to obtain through Unix. From this, our future MBA or CPA learns that Unix people are bigots..."
.NET and VB/C#...
It was mentioned in another thread that there is the definite stereotype of the superioristic, socially inept, f-you if you don't get it or cannot make it work by writing for {insert toolkit here} with {insert (scripting) language here} on {insert distro here}. Many *nix people come across as only being interested in technology as the means and the end, and only that technology which they approve of as being cool.
Your typical MBA doesn't care how cool one language/database/operating system is versus another, they want results, and they want you to spell it out in a cogent cost/benefit summary that they can understand. If all you can puke out is "I am a Unix God and Windows sucks monkey balls" why are you surprised when the consultant with half a clue, an expensive suit, and a degree in technical writing hands him a proposal that is in his native "MBA" language that wins the bid? Could it be that our consultant was not effectively unrefuted by anything substantial from the foaming-at-the-mouth *nix advocate?
It is true that Linux will not be a dominant force on the desktop until there is a pretty, easy to use, intuitive, and well supported GUI. In the same way, until someone does a better marketing job than the boys from Redmond, keep current on
so other people see it; then mode it back down - it'll be overrated when the PHB posts are down.
Tannenbaum (spelled with two(2) n's) talks about
Windows2000 threading model vs. linux's vs. Solaris's in his book Modern Operating Systems.
That's just the threading chapter.
WHY DON'T YOU CHECK YOUR FACTS, SLASHBOT?
The authored only did one comparison between the MS and UNIX/Linux references. All the other times, he just gives Linux references, does that mean that MS is not even mentioned? If so, then how does that explain the prevalence of MS software. I think the article should balance how UNIX/Linux is described and how MS is described in all the cases to draw a clear conclusion that texts are influencing PHBs
I have a first cousin who is a deeply religious man. His father was a minister. His mother (my aunt) was a born again Christian. He has inherited this. He believes with every fiber of his being that the only way to salvation is through Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, etc. He simply does not understand why anyone would not be a Christian because it is so certain that if they do not accept Jesus as their personal Savior they are going to Hell, period.
Although I believe he has a right to his beliefs, I feel the same about Jews and Muslims, and even the Mormons. I mean no disrespect to Christians when I say that from my standpoint I don't understand why my cousin is such an idiot. It is not so much that he is a Christian fundamentalist, but that he brooks no opposition. IMO, he is a very scary fellow.
It's the same with the Linux uber alles crowd. They are so convinced of their superiority, so derogatory of any other beliefs (MS being the primary one), and so disdainful of people who actually use and are comfortable NOT using Linux, that there's no talking to them.
From my standpoint, Linux geeks and my cousin look the same, sound the same, have the same belief structure, and are similarly psychotic. I don't expect either group to really understand a simple fundamental fact: The world can get along without you. And I'm not sure it wouldn't be a better place.
How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
As I say in the longer draft on my site, the students the MS focus looks exhaustive, not illustrative - that's what makes this kind of thing so pernicious.
Linux is the poster child of how you know something's important by its absence in textbooks.
On a similar topic, my so-called company has railroaded us all into online "eLearning", which is just management-speak for Microsoft-drenched how-to propaganda. I started some of these courses, then quit in disgust. Any fool can follow a list of instructions on how to do something in Windows 2000 Server. Where's the beef?
I'll leave the eLearning and other "authorized" IT knowledge paths to the unwashed masses. In the meantime, I must prepare for the glorious day when some company is looking for a Linux guy and finds one in me. Then it'll be time to talk salary.
[You have a stable society when some nut guns down a schoolyard and the law doesn't change.]
The author of the article wonders why UNIX and Linux are not mentioned much in the main Info Systems textbooks.
Well the reason is that the same reason that most Accounting textbooks don't talk about SAP and most Relational Database textbooks don't mention Oracle, Sybase or DB2 - it's because university textbooks (for better or worse) try to teach universal high-level concepts - in this case the role of information systems in business, not the low-level details of how the information systems are implemented.
If you didn't RTFA:
"A variant of Unix called Linux became popular in the late 1990s. A Finnish graduate student named Linus Torvalds developed the software and purposely disclaimed any rights to it, leaving it in the public domain, with the condition that its code and all future versions developed from it remain open to view and change."
Well that's just wrong isn't it? Linus retains all rights to Linux and calls the shots for everything related to it. Seems like it's not just a case of bad attitudes towards Linux being spread around, but a lot of plain misinformation too...
I had a c++ instructor who thought default parameters were created by microsoft
did you forget to take your meds?
In reading the article I couldn't help but wonder if this kind of exclusion of choices in business is covered elsewhere in business classes.
I would bet it would be highly unlikely that a business course on selecting vendors for materials and services contains absolute adherence to a "single source" philosophy. In fact just the opposite is taught. Single source vendors for materials an services are heavily frowned upon in business. A major point of controlling business costs is tied up in pitting vendors for the same or similar materials against one another.
Yet in the absolutely worthless world of MIS, a single source of supply for operating systems on which to run your business is seemingly extolled as a VIRTUE!! All of the textbooks mentioned in this story are worthless drivel, with no critical critique of true use of software in business. No other aspect of a business would be allowed to be beholden to one supplier the way business IT is. And the peopld in charge of business IT don't just accept it, they demand it.
MIS degrees should be banned.
If said PHB forms opinions based solely on what textbooks say, then perhaps he or she should consider getting an education instead of learning to play parrot.
The purpose of education is not to just listen carefully and recite back whatever is fed to you, but to learn to think and evaluate things yourself.
Alas, I know many so-called teachers who don't understand this (and others, such as my eldest son, who I think get it really well.)
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
People are already being sent to Linux training (by their employers) in droves in my area.
.la file is. I definitely could not set up a Linux firewall or routing system without *heavily* drawing from a reference work, not like those Cisco gurus can do with their hardware, where they just happily rattle off commands. I don't have a clue how emerge works, or what its drawbacks are. I don't know how to configure Metacity. I've never seen YaST. I barely know any PHP. Perl's objects are a closed book to me. I develop software, and yet it's still a complete mystery to me how people can write autoconf files without painfully slogging through huge masses of GNU documentation and looking for likely candidates and doing days of cutting and pasting and trial and error. I've never used subversion. These are all standard Linux tools that you'll find on a common distribution.
This should be interesting.
I can't see any kind of training course that effectively teaches someone Linux. You *might* manage to teach someone the GUI configuration front end to Red Hat's current release in a week (including enough background concepts to allow them to understand it). Not much else, though. You definitely can't learn to admin Linux effectively in a week any more than you can learn to admin Windows in a week. I'd go so far as to say that six months of well-thought out curriculum and constant practice probably isn't enough to hammer all the important concepts into someone's head of the workings of just the full set of daemons in a distro, all the important POSIX commands, different security implications, the administrative stuff that a distro uses (keep in mind that this is just for *one* distro) the ins and outs of packge systems, troubleshooting procedures, appropriate forums to go for help and etiquette in those forums, rescue procedures, networking issues...
Maybe it's expecting too much. Most Windows admins that I've run into are barely more than instruction-manual-following monkeys, whereas there are some *scarily* knowledgeable UNIX gurus out there (could be because there are people with thirty years of UNIX experience out there, but none with more than eight of Win95+ experience). You might be able to take a short training course on how to do very basic operation of a system, but if anything breaks, you aren't going to have a *clue* what to do.
God, I've been using Linux heavily for years, and I still don't know standbys like awk (well, just enough to get by, but not much) or anything more than a single operator for sed. I *still* find new commands that I haven't seen before. Groff is a closed book to me. I know a bit of Apache's workings, but not loads. I don't know how to set the systemwide timezone in a distro-independent manner (I could look it up, though). I know almost nothing about sendmail's cf syntax -- without a GUI config frontend, I'd be helpless to get sendmail running, and probably mostly helpless to fix anything more than a basic problem. I don't know what a
May we never see th
... it's so apparent that the title "college graduate" doesn't mean as much as it should. The discrepancies I bet are the same in any number of disciplines. Over specialization -as the famous quote loosely goes- are for insects. And that degree in over specialization might indicate a severe lack of other skills, some of which are necessary in making a well rounded human, in any employment position. Example,these text books. OK, a requirement for that boss management degree, but really, none of these people ever go to a normal bookstore and walk by the magazine rack and see the linux magazines? None of them read any of the tech news sites on the net? I dunno, seems strange to me, but no more strange than all the people who can rattle off hollywood movies and the stars names, or their local sports "team" stars, but who cannot name their own US representative in the house. Part of our culture I guess...
Incidently, that was my impression watching the trump apprentice series as well. I don't watch very much television at all, but for some reason I was interested in that concept, so I've been watching it. All those young people with degrees (except one) and good paying jobs, but almost all of them seemed to lack quite a bit of real world common sense, and all of them had unreasonable expectations, IMO. I know it's stupid reality TV, etc, but still, that was the impression I got.
I'm not a graphics guy so I can't really say if GIMP is that good or bad. But most people have never used it. Those that do graphic work have used Adobe. Adobe is needed on the Linux desktop for the same reason Quickbooks is. If they provide software for Linux then end users can justify the change. Other wise it is a case of abandon everything known about your computer, all you past software, all your data and make the switch. One reason Apple doesn't sell as much as they can is because of some of those issues. Software, data, and training are big investments. To most end users the computer was a bitch to learn the first time and they don't want to go through that again.
Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.
Isn't unix just dos with the backslashes reversed? Actually the company microsoft is older than Sun. I think it boils down more to what is reported in the popular press. What has the highest profile/visibility? Do you really think PHB's read those textbooks? Actually, they are too busy tring to fix problems with their networks and Windows software to read anything. Technology doesn't kill people, it just makes it easier and less personal.
No one ever will "fear" Linux, ever. Don't flatter yourselves.
Scary.
Microsoft is using this irrational zealot behavior to convince more PHB's that Linux is some kind of cult, not just an operating system.
I have never yet seen anyone dare to utter such evil and blasphemous remarks here on slashdot!
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
Besides the curriculum of Uni's, its also the big companies to blame.I used to work for Citi and their policy states that no 'free' or open source software is to be used in any application development for any of their businesses.Not one open source product resides even on their exemption list(policy exemption after approval). ;-)
If you want to use unix buy a HP Unix server(that is if Unix is absolutely critical!), you want a small database get a SQL server.Even if you are paying thousands of $$'s more it does'nt matter.One big arguement is that of support as there is no one to support unix or an open source product.After working for a company like this you actually start believing that what they do is right.
I managed to slip through before they could curropt me.
Lord of the Binges.
The project fails: you get blamed for choosing perceived "flaky" technology, even if that wasn't the cause of the failure.
Say you choose MS instead. The project fails, but in this case you avoid blame because you did it "by the book" (literally), even if the technology in this case did cause the failure.
If the project succeeds, it's probably OK either way ... although some of your colleagues still might look at you funny if you chose the weirdo "free" stuff. You might score points with upper management for saving some costs on licensing fees, but then again, they just might not care.
As a middle-manager, it's very likely you're more interested in avoiding blame than in taking risks that could get you fired. Until general attitudes toward MS change (which is happening), middle management isn't going to be a lot of help.
A long time ago, I read a book by Paul Reps titled "Zen Flesh, Zen Bones", that includes a story, "A Cup of Tea", that is particularly appropriate given the material in this article. I reproduce the story here:
A Cup of Tea
The PHBs have had their heads filled so full with material, and are so unwilling/scared/unable to unlearn it, that their education becomes a liability. Corporations encounter the same kind of problem when they develop "core rigidities" and are unable to rapidly adapt to the ever-changing marketplace.Aside: someone has been kind enough to reproduce this story, along with a number of other excerpts from "101 Zen Stories", and they can be found here.
If the Government becomes a lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law;
Show me the money?
OK, so you are offering constructive critism. Fine. Mention your thoughts and leave it at that.
Oh, you want your ideas dealt with? On your schedule? Choose one of these options:
1. Do it yourself.
2. Pay me to do it for you.
3. Pay someone else to do it for you.
4. Convince someone else to do it for you for free.
Don't bother trying to get me to do it for you for free on your terms. That will not be happening.
Would that show a sufficient lack of zealotry and a sufficient interest in economics to make people happy?
A Nony Mouse
A few years back when I was getting my BS in CS I thought some of the classes were going to be MS centric but only the ones for the Business students were. My teachers were mostly from the punchcard / mainframe / unix days, so that's what we heard about and studied. My Operating Systems class was all theory and touched on MS's NT, but focused on Unix. I eventually got my MCSE outside of college, but I think the theory that I learned is why I am such a big Linux and Mac OS X fan.
Keep MS out of the classroom!
The article is very interesting, but it seems that people have been sidetracked by the easy problem of explaining the meaning of PHB, but avoided the difficult problem of how we can contribute to helping correct the problem of poor management text books and poorly informed managers.
I'm a senior graduating with a CS degree this year. I work for the IT dept on my campus doing web development and it seems like every week I have to try to educate one of my three bosses about some fundamental idea in this area. I'm nearly at the breaking point, even though I only have a month left I'm about ready to quit out of desperation. I just cannot get it through to them that contracts with major companies is not the only answer.
Is there anything good for me to look forward to in the outside world?? Are there any bosses out there that don't make me pull 4 times my weight, but actually help me do my job?
His arguement was that it is not easy to use, it is not guarenteed to continue into the future, and there is no one to be held accountable for failures or for fixes.
.NET. This is all covering a span of under twenty years.
Wow.
not easy to use
I'd give it currently, from an end-user standpoint, about roughly equal to Windows. It is different, though, which means that for a user skilled in Windows, it is more difficult to use at first, until they become familiar with the differences.
it is not guarenteed to continue into the future
I will bet a million bucks that the Linux kernel will be around longer than the Windows NT kernel. There is one company working on the NT kernel -- there are many people working on Linux. Many companies have an investment and the ability and desire to continue using it, and nobody has the ability to "discontinue" Linux.
Or did he mean the APIs? UNIX system and library APIs have been more or less constant since the *'70*s. On Windows, a programmer has had to learn (get ready for it) DOS goodies, Win16, Win32, potentially the missing functionality in Windows CE and the added functionality in WinNT (which, frankly, is vastly more of a pain in the ass than the differences between even "different operating systems" like FreeBSD and Linux). Toss MFC into the mix. Now Microsoft's moving their developers to
Or maybe he was talking about the applications? Sysadmins might learn an application and then it's yanked out from under their feet...but sendmail (then called delivermail) shipped in the *'70*s. How about Apache? It started out as NCSA httpd, and was the second web server ever written.
there is no one to be held accountable for failures or for fixes
Absurd. Unless you are Dell or the US Government (and then only *maybe*), Microsoft does not *care* whether there's a bug in Windows. Name one instance where someone successfully sued Microsoft for a flaw in, say, Windows, and recieved damages for the problems caused by it. You can call Microsoft "accountable" all you want -- they are simply not.
In the Open Source world, I can sit down right now and email the main author, the development team, the maintainer, or the author of a particular feature (and usually *exact* line of code that I care about). I can generally enter bugs into the same bug-tracking system that the developers themselves use. If I'm in a hurry and need a contract for a fix within a certain time bound, I can hire a contractor to fix a bug or add a feature and send that fix to them, even if my company does not have any in-house developers capable of fixing the problem. I can discuss the problem at a technical level and point out the exact lines of code causing the problem publically, with every interested eye in the world trained on the bug. Linux has seen bug fix times for crucial bugs on the order of less than an hour ("there's a TCP bug that needs to be fixed *NOW*) "we need a fix out ASAP". Let's say you use Photoshop and report a bug to Adobe. Maybe, if you're lucky, they'll fix a bug. WilberWorks (a company formed by some GIMP developers) sells service contracts with guarantees that bugs you run into and require fixes for will be fixed within ten *days*. Try getting Adobe interested in doing something like that. Plus, if I don't like WilberWorks, I can hire anyone else to deal with my problem -- there are consultants and programmers-for-hire all over, and I can pay them whatever it takes or have them sign whatever contract I want to get them to fix my problem. Getting someone to be accountable to ensure that Open Source works is much easier than closed source products, where you have only one option -- the original vendor, which generally does not provide support on par with open source developers that provide support contracts (at least of the ones I've noticed). Most closed-source companies have churn, and do not keep developers on a single project. Microsoft, for exampl
May we never see th
Someone touched on this briefly before. I'm back in school going for a BS in CIS. I had been a CS major before for 3 years and after spending the last four years working in IT, I found that I would like to be in management, not a PHB but an actual working manager. Someone who can do the tech work as well as make the decisions. I've since found that the classes are a joke. I'm at a well regarded school but the management courses are common sense and the technical courses I could sleep through. My upper division course I'm taking now, "Management of Web Technologies" would have you believe that IIS is the only sensical way to serve pages. They also seem to think that you can just slap SSL on your server and you suddenly have secure e-commerece. There is too much compromise in the system. I'm not paying $900/course to not learn anything. Just because there is a lot of content in IT management doesn't mean that you can just skim over everything and cross your fingers! Thank god for the web and reading books at Barnes & Noble or I'd never learn a damn thing.
this is off-topic, yet peripherally related...
the book "lies my teacher told me" by some guy named lowen does the same sort of comparative analysis for 11 of the major history texts used in high schools and colleges.
meta-studies such as this article and the lowen book are fascinating to me. just thought i share another such work.
Why the huge emphasis on textbooks? It's not like PHB's stop listening, learning, and adapting after they leave school.
Don't you think these PHB types talk to each other sometimes? Don't you think they read trade magazines? Word has and will continue to get around about Linux.
Big Companies that use Linux:
* Bank of America
* Autozone
* J.P. Morgan
* Golman-Sachs
The list is quite long.
How about putting it in words they can understand. Here's a dirty little secret about business: learning to write a cost-benefit analysis is easier than programming! Seems most geeks couldn't be bothered though.
You'd be suprised how much money you can make making some calls and having some meetings with companies to see if you can save them money. Do the initial consultation free; you find a way to speed up a machine, track inventory better, anything, and can demonstrate it in business terms - you'll probably get a client.
This is how microsoft operates. Linux advocates should take a page from their book.
..don't panic
>therefor a free distro can't be worth as much as an XP or Solaris license.
Yeah, but Linux isn't free for most businesses. They're paying someone for support and if they're not I sure as hell don't want to be one of their customers. I don't think this is asking much, linux without a support contract is dangerous and stupid.
That said, it costs money, except there is a savings because the vendors aren't doing all the development and in many cases all they are doing is providing some apps and support because so many "turn key" solutions already exist. Samba, various email servers, Apache, etc don't need to be written from scratch, marketed, etc.
When you factor in vendors, support, etc its far from free and becomes another product that your company has to do a cost/benefit analysis on.
Case in point: Redhat linux starts at $800 if you want to be able to pick up the phone and talk to someone.
GNU/Linux (the OS) does everything Windows (the OS) does, and then some. Most GNU/Linux distributions include tons of applications that Windows users have to pay hundreds of dollars for, such as Word Processing. GNU/Linux has support for dozens of filesystems, not just its own. GNU/Linux has built-in security and productivity features that have either only recently appeared in Windows, or are architecturally impossible to include. And new versions of GNU/Linux Operating Systems, with better functionality, arrive every year.
Access to source code makes my time-to-market faster, because I can fix problems now rather than wait for vendors to respond. I have access to dozens of office applications, browsers, and e-mail programs, rather than being locked into just one or two. There are no restrictive licenses preventing me from changing how things work or spreading things around.
I can download, install, and use GNU/Linux for free. I only have to pay for support if I want it; if I do, GNU/Linux's higher uptime, greater stability and security over Windows means I will be spending less money keeping my system working and make more money doing my business.
This is not just the state of the art; GNU/Linux has an army of developers that dwarfs Microsoft's staff. GNU/Linux is improving more rapidly than Windows is, and in every aspect. GNU/Linux can afford to waste thousands of man-years on failed projects and branches because they have so many resources to spare, whereas any single company has to keep development costs in check to ensure profitability.
Nobody can compete with more features, more freedom, and lower cost over an extended period of time -- not even a company as large and successful Microsoft. In the long term, Microsoft will have to do what IBM has done -- adopt GNU/Linux and a service-based model. Otherwise, Microsoft won't survive.
Fifteen years from now, everything will be GNU/Linux.
We're a small state govt IT shop, and were seriously considering migrating off our NT4 domain and file/print server platform to Linux/Samba. We'd already deployment a small rollout in our IT department and also in our GIS department and everything was working even better than we'd hoped and we were putting the finishing touches on the plan for the "big migration" with upper management approval when the SCO thing happened. Upper management slammed the brakes on Linux and suddenly $100K became available in our budget with orders to purchase a half dozen new Dell servers loaded with Windows 2003 Server operating system, plus several hundreds of brand new W2K3 CALs (we were told our old NT4 extortions, uh I mean CALs were not legally "upgradeable" and must be thrown out too), plus upgrades to our backup software to bring it up to a version that supports W2K3. I am right now in the middle of migrating all our NT4 domains, user and machine accounts over to a new Active Directory domain forest and should be complete in a couple more weeks. We also have orders to remove all existing Linux installations from any current servers. Thank goodness we're still going to be permitted to run FreeBSD since our web servers, Internet email gateways, and firewalls were all Linux, and I feel resonably comfortable I can retain all the same functionality I need by learning FreeBSD in a hurry.
If your main vendor is HP you can now purchase with linux OEM installed. Bye bye, M$ tax.
We have purchased software packages and been recommended linux as our platform for these packages. Utility is the key here, the fastest way we were able to shoehorn linux was with our IPcop setup. (Yeah, yeah... flame them, but they were IPtables before smoothwall.) It was a fast way of implimenting packetfiltering/IDS (since our ISP controls our edge.)
Linux beats windows on the customized APPs hands down, on top of which qmail laughs at exchange really hard when it comes to message processing and queue handling. In fact I often try and wonder what it would be like having to deal with a mail virus on an exchange server... and then I wake up from my nightmare.
A SMB server running with Winbindd (nt4 style auth) has given us insane reliability for file services. We would not have been able to get it in if it hadn't been configured by default with the NT tie-ins by VA-Linux (on purchase) after having it running and living in it for a while it was cake to roll to RH8/9 and set it up from scratch. The idea being the quick+cheapest solutions are the best in the PHB mind.
3 years ago it was nt4/novell in our rack. Now our targetted custom apps running on RH/trustix boxen are king. Keeping up on the latest linux distros and possible replacement systems for your environment is the key. Don't try and shove it down the PHB throat, make it seem like a pill easily swallowed. And unless you're patient this will never happen due to all the prejudice.
nitpicking is fun.
hate titty pee colon slash slash
Why did the Soviet Union collapse? Because centralized planning and a lack of freedom prevent a complex system from operating efficiently.
Why does the United States prosper? Because of freedom and a lack of top down centralized planning. Every part of the system can react optimally to changing economic conditions.
I think the average business school prof. would agree with the above analysis. You should be able to get said prof. to agree that decentralized systems can adapt to local stimuli better than centralized ones.
You should also get the prof. to agree that monopolies stifle innovation.
So now you ask her how the above facts might be applied to software development. She, not being dumb and seeing where your argument is going (ie. MicroSoft == USSR, OpenSource == USA), will immediately try to convince you that black is white.
PHBs and business professors seem to be immune to logic. They travel in flocks and make baaing sounds. (Just look at all the management fads we've been cursed with. In fact, there is serious opinion that America's worst enemy is the MBA.)
That's OK. Linux will reach its 'tipping point' and everyone will want it. Bah humbug. A pox on them all.
btw. Not all bosses are PHBs. My boss responds quite nicely to bottom line arguments. Credibility is the important factor here. If I say that we can save a bunch of bucks, he believes me. Of course I won't say something until I am darn sure it is true (I'm usually but not always right). Something like a Linux migration would be preceeded by at least one pilot project.
...the misconceptions and misinformation that they present to students.
This isn't a problem in just business schools. I'm currently taking a Linux device drivers class that the kernel license requires that all modules must be released under the GPL, and that the GPL requires all source code to be published.
On being challenged by yours truly, he did back down from his assertion that everything that makes a system call to the Linux kernel must be released under the GPL.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Illinois Institute of Technology has a business school that offers an Information Systems program. I'd figure that there would be some synergies between the geek-side and the white-collar drone side of the school. I was wrong.
.NET.
The textbooks rarely mentioned UNIX or VMS unless it was during a discussion of ancient legacy database or EDI systems or a treatise on the history of client-server computing. There were courses that were specifically slanted toward certain products like Visual Basic, and ASP, with no mention of Delphi or PHP. Database discussions and case studies involving databases were always about Oracle or Microsoft products. There was never a mention of MySQL or PostgreSQL. Linux only came up because my boyfriend is an advocate. We'd discuss equivalent Linux technologies with professors. Those professors who were interested only felt that it wasn't worth it to try to teach those technologies to students since the students want to learn these sexy enterprise computing acronyms like ASP and
To make things worse, the entire school network had been rebuilt using all Microsoft technologies on the front end and a couple of IRIX or SunOS systems on the back far away from prying eyes. The result was a complete divorcing of UNIX from all aspects of computing among the student body with the effect of new students not being exposed to anything but Microsoft Windows (including thin clients). This bothers me a lot since I feel my UNIX and VAX experience has helped shaped my understanding of computing more than what Windows has done.
There is a perception of UNIX and Linux being institutionalized in the university system. UNIX is what was whereas Windows is what will be. Linux is for local chapter ACM members who have long hair and date ugly girls. Windows is for businessmen who drive luxury cars and get blowjobs from beautiful women they hardly know. UNIX is a typewriter in the age of Microsoft Office. UNIX is that mysterious blue box (SGI Indy) sitting in a basement office serving the school's webmail system, and the VAX is a hobbled workhorse that's being put out of its misery as I type.
*Bang* Hear that? That was the sound of six years worth of my emails being erased forever as a VAX completes its last process.
PS: MS practically gives away software to universities.
.NET and Visio for free if we're in certain classes, and XP for the cost of shipping. It's just ridiculous. They're definitely feeling the heat.
Carleton University student access for the MSDNAA software.
We get
To be fair first year we did get WordPerfect Office and RedHat for $20, but hey, we're Ottawa based.
My XP laptop boots into a useable GUI in about 8 seconds. SuSE takes 30 seconds.
How many servers and whatnot is it running?
Seriously, I've never figured out why Linux distributors don't have their Linux systems have the option to just start X11 early in the init process. Most users don't care about a failing service at startup (that's what syslog is for, and if something fails, you can always print an error onscreen once xdm/gdm/kdm is up and going).
XFree86 takes maybe a second or two to get to a login screen on my system. If grub/lilo is set to no delay, and XFree86 is started *first thing* in the init process (as opposed to last, as it is now), it should be possible to get to an X login prompt in something like seven or eight seconds after the grub screen appears. XP just lets all the other services start up in the background while the user is smacking away at the login screen. Linux can pretty easily be told to do the same thing.
May we never see th
We have representatives which the population elects democratically (ignoring crap like the electoral college).
This has been studied and it is a real phenomenon. They are called the "leisure class" and their purchasing decisions are more about impressing people or fitting in than about making good economic decisions. It really screws up capitalism because it leads to inappropriate allocation of resources.
I've seen no evidence that the Linux community is involved in such activities. But it sounds like you personally know this to be the case. If you do know people that are doing this please do us all a favor and turn them over to law enforcement. I'm serious.
You mean they're not? Take a look at /. buddy.
-David
I have seen so many people call the local Microsoft sales rep. and ask them what they think of Linux. I'm willing to bet you can (if you imagine really really really hard) what kind of a reply and analysis they get. Go to the local Ford dealer and ask them what they think of GM this year. What? The report is not good? Well imagine that! Humpff. No one saw that one coming.
can this sco thing be a tactic that microsoft is using. casting a shadow above linux. throwing a time collor on linux so server2003 and winfs come out? keep the developer(s) inline? from switching to linux. seems this is all helping out microsoft and their product lines. 2 business colluding? together?
i'm a self-tough programmer and went through school majoring in management information systems -- miami university (oxford, oh)
... nothing more. very much instilling into students that they were more deserving of being the big dick because they were 'management'
'pathetic' is the only word that can really, accurately describe the level of technical instruction in that department. this is a PHB hatchery, a dilbert incubator. they couldn't have done a better job of being completely avoidant of linux/unix/anythingotherthanmicrosoft. in all seriousness, the only place either unix or linux were ever mentioned was as a vocabulary word -- among the slew of other acronyms we had to memorize with essentially constituted a majority of our 'education'. i swear to this day that school was 0wned by microsoft.
even worse, throughout my entire time there, professors would repeatedly degrade the intelligence of programmers (systems analysis majors) -- as simply 'code monkeys'
i left that school with a degree that essentially, to me, means nothing, and reflects little more than a collection of multiple choice tests, little/no technical skills, a slew of acronyms, a taste of "i'm a manager!" fratboy wanker ego.
I'm guessing that these PHB cadets don't find many errors in their textbooks.
If I could actually stand to be around these sorts of people, boy the fun I would have!
"We've secretly replaced this textbook's normal chapter 4 with this new chapter 4 that contains assertions like 'grass is purple' and 'gasoline tastes yummy'. Let's see if the PHB cadets notice the difference..."
It's been my experience that students with a genuine interest in their studies tend to view all textbooks with a healthy skepticism.
Agreeing with Mr. Murphy is hard. I can't accept that it is really 'ok' to be terribly opinionated (one way or the other) about topics with which you are unfamiliar. I'd say that many (not all) have a great chance of being genuinely moronic.
Microsoft is wildly more intelligent about their products than their hapless buyers. Microsoft gets Linux. Microsoft understands Linux. Linux scares the hell out of Microsoft. Microsoft buyers 'don't get' Linux. They don't understand what all the fuss is about. Microsoft knows. They tell their customers what they want their customers to hear (as usual). Bill says something and people say "yess Bill" (extra s intentional). There is a great cosmic shell game going on here. So long as too many people believe there is a peanut under at least one of those shells, they will continue to put money down. Bill says 'too bad but thanks a lot, better luck next time.'
Yes, but the people you're used to never look like zealots. So Linux supporters see the typical IT suits, with their "Microsoft is everything" mindset, their preference for people with the right tailor, the whole "I'm a genius because I can manage" mentality, and think: MS-brainwashed PHB. We're more likely to be comfortable with other geeks, even if they're loud and opinionated, because we feel like we can have a rational argument even if we disagree. While the suits see something embarassing like RMS on TV crooning the "Free Software Song" and think (besides "don't give up the day job"): "This is the representative of FOSS???"
> You know... I've never met a Windows zealot.
The local members of a student organization at my alma mater have three computers. One of them was old and slow and not quite stable enough to survive a Windows installation. So one of the tech guys there installed Red Hat. You'd think that's okay, right? I mean, the computer is there essentially for people to browse the web and do basic stuff, and if it can't do it with Windows, there's little reason to just have the thing lying there as a paperweight.
But nearly everybody complained. They didn't complain about it being difficult to use. They simply *didn't like Linux*. They complained, for weeks, and rallied with shouts along the lines of "LINUX SUCKS, GET RID OF LINUX!". The *only* wanted Windows, and they would prefer a dead computer to a computer running Linux.
The head of the techs there eventually had to issue a public apology at one of the meetings in order to placate the people. He started his apology with the words "Listen, I know that Linux sucks the cock...".
I have never, ever seen any user of any other operating system (even Mac OS!) act in this irrational, insane manner. Even the most aggressive Linux zealot will (in my experience) respect other peoples' wishes to run Windows or Mac OS or FreeBSD. FreeBSD users will respect Linux users. Mac OS users will frown at -- but accept -- the people who run Windows. But there happen to, in at least one place that I hold dear, be Windows users who turn into rabid, frothing-at-the-mouth sociopaths whenever anybody so much as mentions the word "Linux".
--
-JC
coder
http://www.jc-news.com/parse.cgi?coding/main
Throughout the book, he uses UNIX for examples and only occasionally mentions Windows. The exception is the history of OS's and the case study chapters - one on UNIX/Linux and one on Windows 2000. Solaris isn't even in the index and I doubt it's mentioned anywhere (I haven't ever seen it).
Why don't you put some effort into your trolling?
I'm at York University. The undergrad labs run Solaris. nothing but. yeah it's fun watching the froshies get confused with "what's cd? what's ls?"
but they learn very damn quick.
Yeah, Dude, I hated Windows 85...
This isn't the point they are trying to make, but I have noticed that in the business class I was forced to take, the entire chapter which mentioned computer-based things had many terms which I had never heard of in the IT world. When I pointed this out to my teacher, she asserted that these were the terms the business world used. It would appear that the business world views the IT world form a completely different place than IT views itself, to the point where they have made up their own nonsensical(to me anyways) terms for the exact same concepts. If we can't even agree on what to call things, how could we agree that Linux is a viable strategy for many businesses?
once you go slack, you never go back
I recently checked out a book from my local library titled: "The Career Programmer: Guerilla Tactics for an Imperfect World" by Christopher Duncan.
It has one section that stresses that you need to phrase it all in terms executives understand, cost, extensibility, reliability, time to market, and the effect on the bottom line. Of course going to bosses armed with an "Information Must Be Freed Now" dogma will most likely result in nothing more than marginalizing the cause.
For example, at Georgia Tech I've so far had 3 semesters of CS class, and have learned 4 different languages (Scheme, Python, Java, C), and by the time I'm done I'll go through at least C++ and SmallTalk as well. The idea is that you learn programming concepts, and learn to adjust quickly to whatever language you're using, thereby beoming a more versatile programmer.
Actually, speaking as a first year CS student, Java is still used for teaching the introductory programming courses.
Anyone thats read that list of management crap is bound to be in the dark.
You need - K&R , Aho for compilers, Tannembaum for OS, throw in a bit of Godel Escher Bach for a well rounded philosophical outlook and you all set.
IT books , my ass.
Just Google for photoshop+linux:
Hit #1: Review: Photoshop under Linux -- "Prior to testing CrossOver Office, I was not sure how much the emulation would affect performance.... There do not seem to be any performance bottlenecks. Everything worked seamlessly, as promised... Access to the Photoshop files was easy."
you'll understand that their ignorance isn't entirely their fault.
Lets see, who can we point the finger at?
The school for throwing out MBA's to anyone paying the bill?
The system for saying you need an MBA to make a slightly educated decision?
CowboyNeal?
"Whats that you're doing?"
"Its this great Open Source project - here, check out the url"
"Why are you using that Open Source crap? *scowl* Can't we buy some proper software? Stop using it now."
You also get those PHBs who know they don't get it, and will never get it. They hate you because you do get it, and it makes the PHB feel inferior and stupid. It is then his job to put you down and make your life a misery, just like you have done to him.
It is also this same PHB that will happily run his entire company on pirate copies of the software that he loves so much, when Open Source implementations could legally save him all that money and create a more effective and productive team! I guess he wouldn't be a PHB otherwise... ;) How many times have *you* heard "Lets just buy 1 copy and then we can install that everywhere".
Personally, I think more education is needed but that is not going to happen with a PHB. A PHB gets his learnin' from banner adds and the gutter press (assuming they can read). Maybe if there were "Linux makes you smarter and better looking" adverts they'd go with it? After all, its just as true as "Microsoft Software helps protect your data against virus attacks"...
Even Microsoft knows that, but what most of you Unix/Linux folks dont quite get is that they improved and EVOLVED computing.
If windows never existed, Yes Apple would probaly dominate desktops at home, but in the workplace and The Enterprise old legacy systems and systems as usual would still prevail. Fragmentation, non-standards, excessively expensive hardware, Lowest common denominator applications would still rule the office.
Can you imagine UI, GUI, common sense intuitive apps, driver integration, STANDARDS, all of that would probaly be non-existant in the workplace at its current level without Microsoft entering the Enterprise.
Novell 7. whatever would probaly still be around on a simple command line interface and VI would possibly still be considered the defacto editor of choice. GUI would be considered anything with a color coded text editor (whoope frickin doo).
You can beat yourself over the head for years and whine about Microsoft all you want, but the fact is that they have vastly EVOLVED computing in the Enterprise. Even SUN must bow down to this as they accept their 1.6 billion charity donation. Apple, SUN, who's next?
Get over it. Kudos to SUN.
What is a PHB anyway? (an acronym tag would have been helpful). I asked google, and it suggested:
I'd guess something like "programmer's handbook", but most actual programming books are either for powerful unix/linux development, java, or one of the many half-ass languages from Redmond. Of the useful books in the above collection, the books I've read seem apologetic to the poor windows user.
But looking at the book list from the referenced URL, it looks like most of the books in question are those general-overview-but-teach-nothing books that college professors are always so enamored with. Living in reality as I do, I just avoid those kinds of books.
"The large print giveth, and the small print taketh away" -- "Step Right Up", Tom Waits
This makes NO sense. They're looking at today's textbooks and telling you that these books are the reason that your boss doesn't understand linux? That's complete bull. And they're IT textbooks; only IT/Infrastructure MBAs will read their way through these systems books.
I'm a business undergrad and I work regularly with finance MBAs (as I am in a financial management program that includes 4 of us and 12 of them), and the only thing they think about linux is that it's to be invested in and doesn't run our specialized investment software.
Sorry, but you have to go somewhere besides current textbooks to determine why your older PHBs don't understand linux.
Read jack phelps dot net
I should mention, however, that the Linuxinsider column looks at only one aspect of these texts. As many people here pointed out the focus in business education isn't on the technology but on the uses which can be made of the technology. As a result OS and language details aren't that important; it's the overall ideas that count. However, I was using their treatment of Linux (in a Linux publication) to illustrate one aspect of the range of error in the textbooks.
The bottom line is simple, there are thousands of errors in these books - their treatment of Unix (including Linux) just exemplifies their tendency to substitute MS dogma for research. Check the full draft (referenced in the column and on my site as http://www.winface.com/acm_draft.html for a taxonomy and more examples.
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
When will folks get it that window$$ is not your OS?
Thats right. Those college boneheads in their IT
department disconnected the wrong OS from the LAN.
Hackers...Schmackers! It is windows's designers who
are the hackers. The real hackers. They are busy
designing ways to hack everyone's computer and make
the hacks part of future OS's disguised as 'security
measures'. Romote administrators, URL tattle tales
on boot up, IP reporters to romote URL's hidden in
folk's registries under many layers of esoteric
hexadecimal directories. These are all in Windows,
not Linux. Ever try to get rid of your X:\windows\cookies.dat file? Fun eh? Ever try
to even read it? Sometimes you as administrator
get a message that you do not have the rights to
even see that file. Look at that file in a machine that dual boots Linux and see how windows
spies on your web activity and does God knows what
with it.
What's a PHB (for the rest of the world)?
Thanks in advacne - Dudelman.
My boss is scared to death of using any open source software because he's sure that a lone hacker will look at the code and "figure out how to break in"
I always say that such code is peer-debugged, etc. and that I think bugs are found faster in open source code than in proprietary code, and after that he usually sort of agrees, but the next time I mention OSS, he still gets this goofy grin on his face and says "Well, the only thing I worry about is that some hacker looks at the source..." I'm trying to talk him into using VNC instead of PC Anywhere.
How is he with analogies ? I would explain that deadbolts and door locks are basically "open-source". Everybody knows how they work, and I can even buy a deadbolt of my own to mess with, but that doesn't really help me get past _your_ deadbolt.