Linux Needs Critics

An anonymous reader writes "Keir Thomas berates the fact that the world of Linux almost entirely lacks critics. In fact, he says, Linux people tend to see genuine critical evaluation as a bad thing. FTA: 'The problem with this anti-criticism approach is that it's damning Linux to an eternity of navel gazing. Nothing can ever get any better. The best hope we have are the instances where a few bright sparks, with their heads screwed on the right way, get together and make something cool (as happened with, say, Firefox back in the day). But that's rare and can't be relied upon.'"

Comments

Re:Nonsense

[rednip]

Linux has plenty of critics...Just look through the lkml or read the code

No, that's not 'criticism', well not what passes as that for most people. For many it's always loud and abrasive, public cries for attention, and a hard-headed "hold this line" attitude. Sane, logical, thoughtful discussions, while being the most productive, just don't get noticed.

Re:Nope, it's the putative new users problem

[Daengbo]

They were pre-installed, but the OEMs did such a piss-poor job that it didn't matter. The webcams and wifi still didn't work on many of them. Linux lost the netbook war. Didn't you get the memo? ;)

Re:Nope, it's the putative new users problem

[Daengbo]

In the early part of the decade, Lexmark gave us a few drivers, and people were happy to have them for a while. Eventually, though, the Free software world moved on to CUPS, and the binary Lexmark drivers got bitrot and stopped working on any new distro.

So ... if they decide to make their driver part of the kernel, Xorg, CUPS, or whatever, I'm all for the gift and would be much happier. More likely, though, we'll just see Lexmark Driver, Episode II.