Why Open Standards Matter

Tina Gasperson over at Newsforge (Also owned by VA Software) has an interesting writeup about her experience at the Government Day sub-conference at LinuxWorld Boston. Government Day addressed some interesting issues including some of the more tangible reasons behind supporting open standards. From the article: "Speaking to the audience of government workers, Villa said, 'Maybe 2006 is not the year that Linux ends up on your desktops.' But, he encouraged them, if they begin using software that supports open standards now, such as Firefox and OpenOffice.org, then when Linux is ready it will be that much easier to make a switch. 'And maybe you'll decide not to make that switch,' Villa said. 'But at least the choice will be yours.'"

Comments

fifth

[Anonymous Coward]

post

"Blame Fraunhofer, you should use OGG instead!"

[Anonymous Coward]

The word "advocate" comes from the Scottish term for a lawyer charged with the hopeless task of defending an obviously guilty suspect, and is common parlance among computer types (see the Jargon File) for a mindless zealot who has mistaken the market share of his preferred computer operating system for the girth of his penis, and who believes it to be vitally important that "his" (no, never her) operating system is marketed as efficiently as possible by word of mouth to ludicrously inappropriate consumers.

However, in the case of Linux, it is inappropriate to call the zealots "OS advocates", as the vast majority of their time is not spent on comparing the features of Linux with those of other operating systems, but rather on making up excuses for the shortcomings of Linux on the desktop, and boasting about the stability and speed of Linux installations (usually webservers) utterly incomparable from the one they are recommending you install. You may think I am making this up; I wish I were. I have lost count of the number of times a Linux zealot has seen fit to bring up the subject of the hosting of Slashdot ("and numerous big companies like IBM!") in the context of a conversation about why I can't read my fucking documents any more. It is for this reason that I have coined the following truism:

Windows and MacOS have "advocates"; Linux has "apologists".

Conversations with Linux apologists tend to have three distinct phases:

1. Very erudite-sounding discussion of your problem in terms of software projects which are either pre-alpha vaporware or, more likely, entirely theoretical ideas once floated on Slashdot. ("Yes, what would solve your problem would be the integration of Samba into the kernel with the correct RFS extensions. I think that this is a problem that Alan Cox is working on in the unstable release of Debian 4.9.01a")

2. Grudging acceptance that there is no very good or workable solution to your problem under Linux, coupled with castigation of the iniquities of the software industry. ("Well, of course the real trouble is that HP won't open the driver source specifications so the project has to be carried out on the island of Nauru. Damn that DMCA! I heard Bruce Perens talking about a secret data repository under the sea like in this Neal Stephenson novel ....")

3. Banging on for hours and hours about how fucking wonderful Apache is, if you let them. ("... and even Microsoft runs it for 83% of their intranet servers according to recent Gartner surveys and it really shows that Free Software works in the business environment and it was just put together by this bunch of guys and it just goes to prove ....")

The important concept to bear in mind when discussing software issues with Linux apologists is the "Linux Fault Threshold". Clever use of this concept helps you to avoid losing your temper with someone who might actually be able to render practical help, while ensuring that you give the correct dose of venom (60cc of scorpion juice, administered per anem with a rusty syringe) to the vast crowd of mindless apologists who just want you to use their pet operating system because it makes them feel good and gives them something to boast about on Slashdot. I provide this as a service to all the blind, alcoholic, incontinent grandmothers out there who appear to be installing Linux without any trouble if the Slashdot comments on any article remotely related to user interface design are to be believed.

The Linux Fault Threshold is the point in any conversation about Linux at which your interlocutor stops talking about how your problem might be solved under Linux and starts talking about how it isn't Linux's fault that your problem cannot be solved under Linux. Half the time, the LFT is reached because there is genuinely no solution (or no solution has been developed yet), while half the time, the LFT is reached because your a

Re:"Blame Fraunhofer, you should use OGG instead!"

[Anonymous Coward]

Best post EVAR.

Re:"Blame Fraunhofer, you should use OGG instead!"

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be new here...only old people in Korean use cut and paste because in Soviet Russia, cut and pastes you with a beowulf cluster and hot grits.

best reason to use open standards...

[Jaqui]

I'm sorry your file attachment was a known virus infected format, please resend in an Open Document Format instead of the infestable .doc/.xls binary format originally sent.

The more people that take that stance, the better it is for using open standards.