Microsoft obviously did a good job of creating a very usable OS, although not single handedly. The one thing they did do a great job of is "getting it out there". However you are mislead if you believe that all people that have a disdain of MS are those that worship the CLI.
MS abused it's position of power by stiffling inovation by using it's dominance to remove competition. Without competition, you are not guaranteed to get the best product for the best price. The consumers suffer. The industries suffer.
The reason why many of corporate IT management do not want a breakup is because MS makes their job *easy*. One person said (don't know who) that keeping up with computer/internet technology is like trying to change a tire on a car doing 60 mph. Management is worried about keeping up with the trends and mix/matching products coming from multiple vendors. Most can barely keep what they have under control, and MS makes it easy since they offer pretty much an "answer" for all your needs. Of course, this is a lame excuse. MS products are not necessarily the best for all circumstances.
This break up is a good thing. It will force a more level playing ground.
Everyone Bitching About ID, Just Knock It Off!
on
Another Software Spy
·
· Score: 1
A couple facts:
1. The most recent release of Q3 is a *demo* *test* and when it was released it had not gone gold yet so it was *not* finished. A lot of you seem to think this only applies to the actual application, but until a software project is officially finished, this goes for documentation as well. In other words, the documentation was not *finished* either.
2. It seems that in the previous releases of Q3 there was documentation that notified the end-user that this information was sent to ID for whatever reason. However in the current release it was not there, BUT IT DID NOT EXPLICITLY STATE THAT THE FUNCTIONALITY WAS TAKEN OUT. Looking at this, it looks like a mistake to me which is to be expected in something that is not quite done (see point #1). If this was malicious, then this would be an incredibly stupid group of conspirators to have a history of this documentation in previous releases but then have it mysteriously vanish w/o a trace in the most recent release.
Id has always been accessible to the gaming community in one way or the other in the three years that I've been playing Quake. They release code, encourage mods, update their plans, jump on IRC, give out interviews, reply to a lot more e-mail that I would and post responses to these type of forums.
This seems like a witch hunt to me, and frankly Michael (who posted this) should have considered those two points above, perhaps even contacted Id to get a more rounded view of the situation and then provide a story that was a bit more in perspective (or perhaps not at all). This is poor journalism on the part of/. since they should be more understanding of the facts before they post seriously slanted articles. "I call it a trojan horse program"...get freakin real! This article and the ensuing responses look like an online Jerry Springer show.
Actually, the difference is that RealNetworks *doesn't* tell you that it's monitoring your habits and generating a profile on you before hand. In otherwords, they don't ask you permission to do so.
Haven't tried Napster (and won't), but apparently through the installation process you either realize or are notified that certain contents of your HD are going to be made available.
One alternative is to tap reusable software components and object technologies to improve software development productivity...European IT units at Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. "lean more on using packaged software than we do in the U.S.," which helps boost the Europeans' overall productivity
...is it just me or if you use other peoples modules, classes and objects (that already do the job adequately) you would end up writing less code. The argument of this article has no grounds to stand on.
It even contradicts itself in the end. The last couple paragraphs of this article focus on how shops that reused code are more productive, but the first half of the article tells you that more code means more productivity.
The way I read this article's argument is that...
1. More LOC means more productive workers 2. More productive workers mean better products more often than not (depending on your definition of productive) 3. Ergo: the more LOC the better the product.
...so this must mean that Window$NT MUST the Holy Grail and we should all give up on anything else! Haha...yeah, right.
It's not the price for upgrading that suprises me, but the price for bug fixes.
However, what I find MOST troubling is that most of those who purchase software (in the windows realm) aren't the least bit suprised when it has bugs in it. Or to find out that tech support can't help them because there's not a fix for it. They may be a little miffed, but they just accept it even though there is *rarely* a money-back guarantee.
I mean COME ON! I don't expect a $1 razor to be defective, but I'll return it if it is and get a new one that *works* or get my money back. Isn't facinating how a most of the software vendors for windoze put disclaimers on there software that states there is no guarantee with this software at all what-so-ever? Isn't it more amazing that those users just sit and take it?
Micro$oft has really poisoned the water of expectation that their customers have for the platform and the software that runs on it.
Your ideas for picking the moderators are good ones and I don't really see a need to change those criteria until you're proven it's not a good model to work from.
Now here are some suggestions...
1. Restricting a moderator from posting in a topic they want to take part of, and vice versa, is a double edged sword. Sure if they post, they already have an agenda which may indicate a biased slant on other posters they moderate, but here are two arguments against that...
There seems to be a greater chance of a moderator who posts to an article to have a greater understanding of the topic than those that don't. Ergo they should prove (percentage wise mind you) to be better moderators than those who have no desire to post.
If you're forcing moderators to read replies to articles they have no interest in posting to, it sounds more like 'work' than something worthwhile.
2. Moderators should receive Peer-Review at intervals during their "career" here at/. Something that brings up their moderations for review in an anonymous "poll" where no one knows who they are but they can evaluate a random snapshot of their moderations.
I have my threshold at 2, which was great in the begining where some really nice posts showed up but now I'm seeing more, and more, replies like "Who is this Linus guy?" being scored a 2.
Perhaps this could also be helped if there was a grading scale like.
Score/Represents -1 Raw, off-topic, flaming-flamingo slug-fests 0 One liner comments, not much meat to 'em (AC Default) 1 Light on content, but interesting (Registered Users Default) Raises an interesting question or point 3 Like 2 but well done 4 Wow, great insight...this could be another article 5 Are you sure you're not RMS or ESR?
...although I might be straying a bit off topic, this will probably be an issue in the future: How to police the moderators?
It's a shame to see JWZ leaving Mozilla. I really admire what he's done over the past year (and before when he was preaching to the execs to make this happen). I wish him all the luck.
However, I think what he posted was unprofessional. It was incredibly negative, loaded with resignation. When you become a powerful influence over a body of people you need to be able to put personal feelings by the wayside instead of airing them out at inopportune times.
There are a lot of people that look to him for leadership, so what do you think their reaction is going to be to this? Do you think this boosts moral among the fantastic programmers working on next generation of Navigator? I mean if someone with all his ability is giving up, what the hell kind of message is that conveying to the other guys and gals in the trenches crunching out the code?
He should have been more consciencious with his departing explaination to try to not convey too much negativity. Wait until someone else has filled his shoes and garner the support of the Mozilla team before releasing something like this. If he really cared he would try to make the transition smoother for the next guy or gal taking his place. What he's done seems rather selfish. He expected too much, too soon, with market pressure bearing down and he got let down. So he's giving up.
God, I hate that phrase.
His leaving is the best for him and Mozilla. If he kept with the project, feeling like he does, he would probably be more of a hinderance than a help.
This doesn't only apply to JWZ, but to our other leaders (yeah, they don't like being called that but they are in a fashion) in the OSS community. They need to think first about what the impact will be when their negative writings wash over those of us who look to them for inspiration, knowing that we'll never be as great as they are. JWZ has more talent in his pinky-tip than I'll ever have.
This should also be a wake-up call! Those of us not doing their part should go over to Mozilla.org and lend a hand. If you can't code, run the builds and report bugs. I believe Netscape will overcome this hurdle, but they need support.
Anyway, again I wish nothing but good luck, and happiness to JWZ. Good luck to him!
Albert Einstein dropped out of high school at age 15, moved to Switzerland with his folks. He did resume his studies at the Federal Polytechnic Academy in Zürich when he was 16 and graduated.
But he was technically a high-school drop out.
It isn't all relative. It also is quantum mechanics. String Theory ties all this together. But it was a pun.
You should quit buying your undwear two sizes too small. It'll make you more relaxed.
Seems like this long-winded gripe against new users to Debian can be shortened:
"Everything that is powerful is complex. Things that aren't complex suck, and it really bothers me when new users complain about things that I consider mundane. Oh yeah, Red Hat sucks too because it's not complex and they use marketing phrases to describe their product."
His view is quite understandable. There is a wonderful feeling of power when you finally bring Linux up and running for the first time. I'll never forget the feeling I got when I got my modem working (period!) and to connect to my ISP (icing!)...it was fantastic.
My problem is that this a narrow-minded vision of what he wants one distribution to be. He wants people to go what he went through, and that's the only way to learn. He won't give out answers that could be figured out in under 30 minutes on their own by reading the manual.
That's fine for him, but all people don't learn the same way. Just because someone doesn't do exactly what he does, the way he does it, it's bad or not "pure". If someone could save me 28 minutes by giving me a 2 minute explanation BUT DOESN'T I'd be pretty pissed. Especially a co-worker! Plus, one of his requirements for learning *nix is to...spend three years recompiling packages to the latest versions... Recompiling packages doesn't guarantee you know how best to use them (or at all), or what the trade offs are for implementing it one way instead of another.
Call me crazy, but I thought the whole philosophy behind Open Source was the dissemination of information, not withholding it. You can ignore who you want, but I've found some real time savers in e-mail list archives in responses to (what I now consider) easy questions. Plus, who has tons of extra time on their hands?
You learn by using, not necessarily by installing. BTW...if it takes 12 times to install something (I don't care what it is) there is a fundamental problem with either the user or the software. But because someone can't make it through an install, does that mean they're a moron and not "worthy" to use Linux? I think we'd loose some potentially great additions to the community by ignoring this.
Would you consider someone who never finished high school to be stupid? Albert Einstein never finished HS. It's all relative (pun intended).
On the point of Linux software being inherently complicated to use (i.e. no GUI and lots, and lots, of options) that is because these packages where initially created to fill the need of the person who created it. Because they knew exactly what they wanted done, there's really no need to create wondrous, majestic GUI's. It's not to scare off newbies or because wrapping a GUI around it would make it less powerful. The important thing is that it *does* exactly what they want it to do. Making a broad generalization that if (GUI) {software = "lousy"} is an irresponsible statement.
A word on tech support. Customers pay for that. If you're manning the lines, you know you get stupid calls quite often. But they have the right to ask. They spent money on it. They deserve it. Don't like it? Quit. End of discussion. (and yes, did that for 3 years).
Then at the end he throws in Red Hat just so he can gripe some more. Sheesh! How does this apply to Debian in any way, shape or form? It doesn't.
Bottom line, if he doesn't like the way the Debian maintainers are taking this distribution then he can make his own. That's what it's all about right? Flexibility, power, reliability and customization?
Readers: Either you filter him, ignore him or read him. How hard is that? Any other excuse is lame.
/. : Either you keep him or get rid of him. Posting something like this on your site is throwing gasonline on the fire. These type of posts are antagonistic and fostering the controversy. If you're trying to defend Katz, then do it off the main page in a prepared statement that gets updated often.
Personally I like his work and have e-mailed him a couple times to compliment his work and tell him to ignore the flames. BUT, you guys need to decide./. is starting to feel tabloid-ish with these kind of "news" items.
If you want him (hope you do!) then keep him. People don't like it...tough! If not bag him, and if people don't like *that*...tough! You said it yourself "...in the end its up to me".
I've read the talkback bit and a couple of his paragraphs in the "security hole" issue. There is some truth to what he's saying, but he also needs to take a step back and review both the situation he's getting into and his article.
There's a saying that someone who knows the best is usually the worst at teaching it. Why? Because they forget what it was like to learn it. To them it's second nature. What sounds like an obvious or stupid question to them is something new or profound to someone just starting out.
Yes there's arrogant, malicious posters on/., however I don't believe any more so than any other area that has a dedicated following (in regards to vocal antagonists). It may seem like a lot, but the Internet is where the majority of us are most comfortable (it's where we work, learn and play) so it's going to be where we're most vocal. Therefore it would seem there are more flaming displays by the Linux/OSS movement. I believe it's all relative. Hey, we're not taking out doctors at *cough* abortionist *cough* clinics with high-powered rifles.
There are a lot of irrelevant (flames, ramblings, off-topic) posts to/., so yes Newbies are probably turned away from this site believing that that's what/. is trying to foster (you guys aren't however, it just comes with the territory).
As for Lewis A. Mettler, I've read his piece on ZDNN and agree somewhat, but, after reading his prose off his site I can see why he got broiled. If I understand his point (I just skimmed through a bit of it), he's saying that if you *rebuild* the source code (the system) then you can do whatever you want including granting yourself SU status. Well hell yeah.
The OS can simply be changed by altering the source code and preparing a new build of the OS.
By rebuilding the OS you need su rights or you format the machine and reinstall (rebuild) it.
Can a similar attack take place without the source code? The short answer is "No, it can not".
Yes, you can. I can format a drive w/NT and give myself any privs I want. And if it's about su status, there are other issues instead of rebuilding here. There's a major flaw in his argument, and one he doesn't address: a system's security is only as good as the administrator who runs it.
You can take any software, OS or otherwise, magnify a weakness of it and create any hypothetical reason you want to point out that it's a Bad Thing. And you're probably right, but only in that particular scenario (however implausable it may or may not be). But to take that conclusion, shoot up to 25,000 feet and make a broad generalization of the OS as a whole, based on that conclusion, is poor deduction.
His article is also populated by a lot of questions and assumes little knowledge on the end user of what Linux, source code and su status is. That, my friend, just won't fly with this crowd. It's going to come off as demeaning to/. readers. You need to know your audience, and he apparently didn't do his homework.
Everyone wants software and V-chips to do the parenting for them.
I see increasing problems with the lack of responsibility parents are showing these days. With two income households becoming more the norm, parents have less time for their children so they are trying to burden the government, school districts and corporations to do the parenting for them.
IMHO censorship is the absolute worst thing a child can experience. One day they will be in a situation that they were censored from before, and now they have no point of reference to base an education decision on.
Parents need to sit down with their children while they're on the internet and learn with them (because you know the ones who know the least about it are the loudest advocators of bills like the CDA).
They need to explain to their kids what it is to have safe sex and use a condom (face it, it's going to happen, so better for them to hear it from you).
Make sure they have money to call a cab in case they "find" themselves at a party where they or their ride is too hammered to drive home. Hehehe...I "found" myself in quite a number of those situations:)
And so on...
Parents need to be parents, across the board, and the Internet is just one example. If they don't talk to their kids about what needs to be talked about, then they'll find out from their friends.
Man that was a funny conversion. Turned the article into "Germish" or "Engman". Couldn't translate a couple words. Kinda cool, funny and frustrating at the same time.
Go back to reading Slate instead! Who are you to decide what's appropriate or not anyway? I'm totally stoked for this movie, love/. for making me aware of recent super-cool net-events.
Although I should thank you...it was your last post right? WooHoo!
All those Katz haters accusing/. of "taking the money and run" are missing the point.
My read (heh...get it?) on this posting is another revelation of the true power of the Internet and of the readers of/. Most of the readers here are pro OSS, anti-MS, programmers, sys-admins and all around technical bit heads. There are many who dismiss us, consider us rebels (or what not) who only care about renegade software and breaking away from conformity (according to industry thinking at the least).
But we have the ability to be movers and shakers outside of what others perceive as our isolated world. Amazon.com, publishing and media in this example. That's the point.
Of course I could be way off base, and I'm sometimes a rambler, but it's just my $0.02.
// Flame on
Everyone who bought the book knows that/. gets some of the proceeds (any book when linked of/....it's on the front page for Christ's sake) and they're adult enough to make their own decisions.
And bitching cause the 'filters' aren't working. You mean the hyperlinked "Jon Katz" text brandishing the begining of the front page excerpt doesn't tip you off? You clicked to it, read it and posted to it. It's a weak excuse.
If it was truly a philosophical issue then who cares about the name? I believe that RS should get all the credit he deserves, but it appears that he dodges the mainstream. As soon as something starts getting big, he splinters off. Otherwise he could have all the recognition he deserves.
Sounds like some sour grapes in there too. Seems like they're both a part of the same team and trashing doesn't help anything.
Of course I could be way off base. Just my impression:)
...why did the Apple spokeswoman decline comment? If you have nothing to hide then why hide it?
Another thing, wouldn't you agree that the "fact checking" should be done by CNet?!?!?! They have a responsibility for reporting the news accurately ; it is what establishes their credibility; which is why people pay attention to what CNet has to say -> which is how they make money. It's their business.
Back off Taco man. You have no basis in reality if you expect/. to deploy their research team (like they have the $ for one, not) on every potential story.
Don't take it personally, because the guys who bitch the most do it because they can hide behind a monitor in complete anonymity. The are cowards behind the mask.
These guys are the type of people who can't handle to see someone else get a little success and/or favorable recognition from the peers that they to respect (and don't themselves have).
Jealousy.
I'm more a lurker than a poster, but this stuff turns my stomach.
...you take the cake! You think you know Rob/Jon or anybody at/. well enough to make personal requests! This after the fact that they made a public stand behind Katz and support him 110%?
Slashdot Mirror
http://finger.planetqu ake.com/plan.asp?userid=johnc&id=14425
Microsoft obviously did a good job of creating a very usable OS, although not single handedly. The one thing they did do a great job of is "getting it out there". However you are mislead if you believe that all people that have a disdain of MS are those that worship the CLI.
MS abused it's position of power by stiffling inovation by using it's dominance to remove competition. Without competition, you are not guaranteed to get the best product for the best price. The consumers suffer. The industries suffer.
The reason why many of corporate IT management do not want a breakup is because MS makes their job *easy*. One person said (don't know who) that keeping up with computer/internet technology is like trying to change a tire on a car doing 60 mph. Management is worried about keeping up with the trends and mix/matching products coming from multiple vendors. Most can barely keep what they have under control, and MS makes it easy since they offer pretty much an "answer" for all your needs. Of course, this is a lame excuse. MS products are not necessarily the best for all circumstances.
This break up is a good thing. It will force a more level playing ground.
A couple facts:
/. since they should be more understanding of the facts before they post seriously slanted articles. "I call it a trojan horse program"...get freakin real! This article and the ensuing responses look like an online Jerry Springer show.
1. The most recent release of Q3 is a *demo* *test* and when it was released it had not gone gold yet so it was *not* finished. A lot of you seem to think this only applies to the actual application, but until a software project is officially finished, this goes for documentation as well. In other words, the documentation was not *finished* either.
2. It seems that in the previous releases of Q3 there was documentation that notified the end-user that this information was sent to ID for whatever reason. However in the current release it was not there, BUT IT DID NOT EXPLICITLY STATE THAT THE FUNCTIONALITY WAS TAKEN OUT. Looking at this, it looks like a mistake to me which is to be expected in something that is not quite done (see point #1). If this was malicious, then this would be an incredibly stupid group of conspirators to have a history of this documentation in previous releases but then have it mysteriously vanish w/o a trace in the most recent release.
Id has always been accessible to the gaming community in one way or the other in the three years that I've been playing Quake. They release code, encourage mods, update their plans, jump on IRC, give out interviews, reply to a lot more e-mail that I would and post responses to these type of forums.
This seems like a witch hunt to me, and frankly Michael (who posted this) should have considered those two points above, perhaps even contacted Id to get a more rounded view of the situation and then provide a story that was a bit more in perspective (or perhaps not at all). This is poor journalism on the part of
Just my 2.
Actually, the difference is that RealNetworks *doesn't* tell you that it's monitoring your habits and generating a profile on you before hand. In otherwords, they don't ask you permission to do so.
Haven't tried Napster (and won't), but apparently through the installation process you either realize or are notified that certain contents of your HD are going to be made available.
http://www.redhat.com/mirrors.html
And I quote...
:|
One alternative is to tap reusable software components and object technologies to improve software development productivity...European IT units at Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. "lean more on using packaged software than we do in the U.S.," which helps boost the Europeans' overall productivity
...is it just me or if you use other peoples modules, classes and objects (that already do the job adequately) you would end up writing less code. The argument of this article has no grounds to stand on.
It even contradicts itself in the end. The last couple paragraphs of this article focus on how shops that reused code are more productive, but the first half of the article tells you that more code means more productivity.
The way I read this article's argument is that...
1. More LOC means more productive workers
2. More productive workers mean better products more often than not (depending on your definition of productive)
3. Ergo: the more LOC the better the product.
...so this must mean that Window$NT MUST the Holy Grail and we should all give up on anything else! Haha...yeah, right.
Ok...back to being lazy and unproductive
mr2
It's not the price for upgrading that suprises me, but the price for bug fixes.
However, what I find MOST troubling is that most of those who purchase software (in the windows realm) aren't the least bit suprised when it has bugs in it. Or to find out that tech support can't help them because there's not a fix for it. They may be a little miffed, but they just accept it even though there is *rarely* a money-back guarantee.
I mean COME ON! I don't expect a $1 razor to be defective, but I'll return it if it is and get a new one that *works* or get my money back. Isn't facinating how a most of the software vendors for windoze put disclaimers on there software that states there is no guarantee with this software at all what-so-ever? Isn't it more amazing that those users just sit and take it?
Micro$oft has really poisoned the water of expectation that their customers have for the platform and the software that runs on it.
Now here are some suggestions...
1. Restricting a moderator from posting in a topic they want to take part of, and vice versa, is a double edged sword. Sure if they post, they already have an agenda which may indicate a biased slant on other posters they moderate, but here are two arguments against that...
2. Moderators should receive Peer-Review at intervals during their "career" here at
I have my threshold at 2, which was great in the begining where some really nice posts showed up but now I'm seeing more, and more, replies like "Who is this Linus guy?" being scored a 2.
Perhaps this could also be helped if there was a grading scale like.
Score/Represents
-1 Raw, off-topic, flaming-flamingo slug-fests
0 One liner comments, not much meat to 'em (AC Default)
1 Light on content, but interesting (Registered Users Default)
Raises an interesting question or point
3 Like 2 but well done
4 Wow, great insight...this could be another article
5 Are you sure you're not RMS or ESR?
...although I might be straying a bit off topic, this will probably be an issue in the future: How to police the moderators?
Just my 2
It's a shame to see JWZ leaving Mozilla. I really admire what he's done over the past year (and before when he was preaching to the execs to make this happen). I wish him all the luck.
However, I think what he posted was unprofessional. It was incredibly negative, loaded with resignation. When you become a powerful influence over a body of people you need to be able to put personal feelings by the wayside instead of airing them out at inopportune times.
There are a lot of people that look to him for leadership, so what do you think their reaction is going to be to this? Do you think this boosts moral among the fantastic programmers working on next generation of Navigator? I mean if someone with all his ability is giving up, what the hell kind of message is that conveying to the other guys and gals in the trenches crunching out the code?
He should have been more consciencious with his departing explaination to try to not convey too much negativity. Wait until someone else has filled his shoes and garner the support of the Mozilla team before releasing something like this. If he really cared he would try to make the transition smoother for the next guy or gal taking his place. What he's done seems rather selfish. He expected too much, too soon, with market pressure bearing down and he got let down. So he's giving up.
God, I hate that phrase.
His leaving is the best for him and Mozilla. If he kept with the project, feeling like he does, he would probably be more of a hinderance than a help.
This doesn't only apply to JWZ, but to our other leaders (yeah, they don't like being called that but they are in a fashion) in the OSS community. They need to think first about what the impact will be when their negative writings wash over those of us who look to them for inspiration, knowing that we'll never be as great as they are. JWZ has more talent in his pinky-tip than I'll ever have.
This should also be a wake-up call! Those of us not doing their part should go over to Mozilla.org and lend a hand. If you can't code, run the builds and report bugs. I believe Netscape will overcome this hurdle, but they need support.
Anyway, again I wish nothing but good luck, and happiness to JWZ. Good luck to him!
Not Bullshit ;)
r y=albert+einstein&DBase=Articles
Albert Einstein dropped out of high school at age 15, moved to Switzerland with his folks. He did resume his studies at the Federal Polytechnic Academy in Zürich when he was 16 and graduated.
But he was technically a high-school drop out.
It isn't all relative. It also is quantum mechanics. String Theory ties all this together. But it was a pun.
You should quit buying your undwear two sizes too small. It'll make you more relaxed.
More reading on Einstein can be had at...
http://www.eb.com:180/bol/search?type=topic&que
Seems like this long-winded gripe against new users to Debian can be shortened:
...spend three years recompiling packages to the latest versions... Recompiling packages doesn't guarantee you know how best to use them (or at all), or what the trade offs are for implementing it one way instead of another.
"Everything that is powerful is complex. Things that aren't complex suck, and it really bothers me when new users complain about things that I consider mundane. Oh yeah, Red Hat sucks too because it's not complex and they use marketing phrases to describe their product."
His view is quite understandable. There is a wonderful feeling of power when you finally bring Linux up and running for the first time. I'll never forget the feeling I got when I got my modem working (period!) and to connect to my ISP (icing!)...it was fantastic.
My problem is that this a narrow-minded vision of what he wants one distribution to be. He wants people to go what he went through, and that's the only way to learn. He won't give out answers that could be figured out in under 30 minutes on their own by reading the manual.
That's fine for him, but all people don't learn the same way. Just because someone doesn't do exactly what he does, the way he does it, it's bad or not "pure". If someone could save me 28 minutes by giving me a 2 minute explanation BUT DOESN'T I'd be pretty pissed. Especially a co-worker! Plus, one of his requirements for learning *nix is to
Call me crazy, but I thought the whole philosophy behind Open Source was the dissemination of information, not withholding it. You can ignore who you want, but I've found some real time savers in e-mail list archives in responses to (what I now consider) easy questions. Plus, who has tons of extra time on their hands?
You learn by using, not necessarily by installing. BTW...if it takes 12 times to install something (I don't care what it is) there is a fundamental problem with either the user or the software. But because someone can't make it through an install, does that mean they're a moron and not "worthy" to use Linux? I think we'd loose some potentially great additions to the community by ignoring this.
Would you consider someone who never finished high school to be stupid? Albert Einstein never finished HS. It's all relative (pun intended).
On the point of Linux software being inherently complicated to use (i.e. no GUI and lots, and lots, of options) that is because these packages where initially created to fill the need of the person who created it. Because they knew exactly what they wanted done, there's really no need to create wondrous, majestic GUI's. It's not to scare off newbies or because wrapping a GUI around it would make it less powerful. The important thing is that it *does* exactly what they want it to do. Making a broad generalization that if (GUI) {software = "lousy"} is an irresponsible statement.
A word on tech support. Customers pay for that. If you're manning the lines, you know you get stupid calls quite often. But they have the right to ask. They spent money on it. They deserve it. Don't like it? Quit. End of discussion. (and yes, did that for 3 years).
Then at the end he throws in Red Hat just so he can gripe some more. Sheesh! How does this apply to Debian in any way, shape or form? It doesn't.
Bottom line, if he doesn't like the way the Debian maintainers are taking this distribution then he can make his own. That's what it's all about right? Flexibility, power, reliability and customization?
Readers: Either you filter him, ignore him or read him. How hard is that? Any other excuse is lame.
/. is starting to feel tabloid-ish with these kind of "news" items.
/. : Either you keep him or get rid of him. Posting something like this on your site is throwing gasonline on the fire. These type of posts are antagonistic and fostering the controversy. If you're trying to defend Katz, then do it off the main page in a prepared statement that gets updated often.
Personally I like his work and have e-mailed him a couple times to compliment his work and tell him to ignore the flames. BUT, you guys need to decide.
If you want him (hope you do!) then keep him. People don't like it...tough! If not bag him, and if people don't like *that*...tough! You said it yourself "...in the end its up to me".
There's a saying that someone who knows the best is usually the worst at teaching it. Why? Because they forget what it was like to learn it. To them it's second nature. What sounds like an obvious or stupid question to them is something new or profound to someone just starting out.
Yes there's arrogant, malicious posters on /., however I don't believe any more so than any other area that has a dedicated following (in regards to vocal antagonists). It may seem like a lot, but the Internet is where the majority of us are most comfortable (it's where we work, learn and play) so it's going to be where we're most vocal. Therefore it would seem there are more flaming displays by the Linux/OSS movement. I believe it's all relative. Hey, we're not taking out doctors at *cough* abortionist *cough* clinics with high-powered rifles.
There are a lot of irrelevant (flames, ramblings, off-topic) posts to /., so yes Newbies are probably turned away from this site believing that that's what /. is trying to foster (you guys aren't however, it just comes with the territory).
As for Lewis A. Mettler, I've read his piece on ZDNN and agree somewhat, but, after reading his prose off his site I can see why he got broiled. If I understand his point (I just skimmed through a bit of it), he's saying that if you *rebuild* the source code (the system) then you can do whatever you want including granting yourself SU status. Well hell yeah.
By rebuilding the OS you need su rights or you format the machine and reinstall (rebuild) it. Yes, you can. I can format a drive w/NT and give myself any privs I want. And if it's about su status, there are other issues instead of rebuilding here. There's a major flaw in his argument, and one he doesn't address: a system's security is only as good as the administrator who runs it.You can take any software, OS or otherwise, magnify a weakness of it and create any hypothetical reason you want to point out that it's a Bad Thing. And you're probably right, but only in that particular scenario (however implausable it may or may not be). But to take that conclusion, shoot up to 25,000 feet and make a broad generalization of the OS as a whole, based on that conclusion, is poor deduction.
His article is also populated by a lot of questions and assumes little knowledge on the end user of what Linux, source code and su status is. That, my friend, just won't fly with this crowd. It's going to come off as demeaning to /. readers. You need to know your audience, and he apparently didn't do his homework.
You made a key comment...
:)
Everyone wants software and V-chips to do the parenting for them.
I see increasing problems with the lack of responsibility parents are showing these days. With two income households becoming more the norm, parents have less time for their children so they are trying to burden the government, school districts and corporations to do the parenting for them.
IMHO censorship is the absolute worst thing a child can experience. One day they will be in a situation that they were censored from before, and now they have no point of reference to base an education decision on.
Parents need to sit down with their children while they're on the internet and learn with them (because you know the ones who know the least about it are the loudest advocators of bills like the CDA).
They need to explain to their kids what it is to have safe sex and use a condom (face it, it's going to happen, so better for them to hear it from you).
Make sure they have money to call a cab in case they "find" themselves at a party where they or their ride is too hammered to drive home. Hehehe...I "found" myself in quite a number of those situations
And so on...
Parents need to be parents, across the board, and the Internet is just one example. If they don't talk to their kids about what needs to be talked about, then they'll find out from their friends.
Who would you trust more?
Man that was a funny conversion. Turned the article into "Germish" or "Engman". Couldn't translate a couple words. Kinda cool, funny and frustrating at the same time.
wooHoo!
It's Friday.
Why is it that there are 3 links to Richard Thieme (mailto:rthieme@thiemeworks.com) in the Related Links section? Isn't that redundant?
You got a poster of Anakin with Darth's shadow? Where and are they still availabe?
Go back to reading Slate instead! Who are you to decide what's appropriate or not anyway? I'm totally stoked for this movie, love /. for making me aware of recent super-cool net-events.
Although I should thank you...it was your last post right? WooHoo!
...but doesn't Marc Merlin look an awfully lot like Mr. Bean?
All those Katz haters accusing /. of "taking the money and run" are missing the point.
/. Most of the readers here are pro OSS, anti-MS, programmers, sys-admins and all around technical bit heads. There are many who dismiss us, consider us rebels (or what not) who only care about renegade software and breaking away from conformity (according to industry thinking at the least).
/. gets some of the proceeds (any book when linked of /. ...it's on the front page for Christ's sake) and they're adult enough to make their own decisions.
My read (heh...get it?) on this posting is another revelation of the true power of the Internet and of the readers of
But we have the ability to be movers and shakers outside of what others perceive as our isolated world. Amazon.com, publishing and media in this example. That's the point.
Of course I could be way off base, and I'm sometimes a rambler, but it's just my $0.02.
// Flame on
Everyone who bought the book knows that
And bitching cause the 'filters' aren't working. You mean the hyperlinked "Jon Katz" text brandishing the begining of the front page excerpt doesn't tip you off? You clicked to it, read it and posted to it. It's a weak excuse.
// Flame off
ugh!
If it was truly a philosophical issue then who cares about the name? I believe that RS should get all the credit he deserves, but it appears that he dodges the mainstream. As soon as something starts getting big, he splinters off. Otherwise he could have all the recognition he deserves.
:)
Sounds like some sour grapes in there too. Seems like they're both a part of the same team and trashing doesn't help anything.
Of course I could be way off base. Just my impression
Ben
...why did the Apple spokeswoman decline comment? If you have nothing to hide then why hide it?
/. to deploy their research team (like they have the $ for one, not) on every potential story.
Another thing, wouldn't you agree that the "fact checking" should be done by CNet?!?!?! They have a responsibility for reporting the news accurately ; it is what establishes their credibility; which is why people pay attention to what CNet has to say -> which is how they make money. It's their business.
Back off Taco man. You have no basis in reality if you expect
Mr2
Flames always burn out eventually.
/. !!!
Don't take it personally, because the guys who bitch the most do it because they can hide behind a monitor in complete anonymity. The are cowards behind the mask.
These guys are the type of people who can't handle to see someone else get a little success and/or favorable recognition from the peers that they to respect (and don't themselves have).
Jealousy.
I'm more a lurker than a poster, but this stuff turns my stomach.
Keep up the good work Katz and THE team at
Mr2
...you take the cake! You think you know Rob/Jon or anybody at /. well enough to make personal requests! This after the fact that they made a public stand behind Katz and support him 110%?
Think before you write.