"As long as the Linux guru community responds to honest feedback on the problems of their precious OS with such vile hatred and criticism, converts are going to be put out and go back to "friendly Windows."
Now if this isn't a time tested argument here on/., what is?
1. Write something stupid and false 2. Get called on it 3. Start to whine that with all those evil people around Linux will never be a success. 4. Profit
It's really getting boring.
But in a way your reaction is also hilarious, as you are the guy who reacted to a tongue in cheek artilce about Linux not being so bad after all with a lengthy blog entry full of factual inacuracies, unfounded assumptions and name calling.
That you of all people should now complain about "vile hatred and criticism" without even noticing the irony is incredible.
1. Linux is too complicated "Suppose I install Gnome as default and want to install KDE and use that as the default. How easy is that? Well, every time I try, I have to search through several configuration files with 100s of lines to find the one that specifies the default GUI, and then it often doesn't even work."
Ehm, install it and choose KDE as the default session the next time you see a login screen. Not really hard.
2. Linux is too complicated "How many patches must you apply to SuSE right after install for all the security fixes? Dozens. Windows? Dozens. Hmmm... Seems about even there. To be safe, you ought to be behind a firewall in either case. I've never found a recent Linux distro that didn't have patches ready to install as soon as I finished installing to OS."
Jesus... For starters having to download security updates doesn't really have that much to do with what the guy you are answering wrote and with ease of setting an OS up. Second, this has been discussed right here on/. about a million times, but as you don't seem to be aware of it: Comparing Suse, which comes with thousands of programs with Windows, which comes with barely anything and then pointing out that you also have to download updates for Suse is pretty dumb, as you compare Apples and Oranges here.
3. Linux doesn't have enough applications "Let's compare apples to apples here. Windows is an OS, not a set of applications." Why now and not before?
"You Linux fanatics get on Microsoft for bundling apps with their OS" Small correction, most of the time it's not us Linux fantics, whoever this may be, but law enforcement agencies that get on MS for abusing their monopoly.
"Windows as an OS isn't inferior just because your open source app doesn't run on it. If you are so big on choices and freedom, why don't you write your app to run on both? " Well, everyone is free to choose to take the source code and port it to windows and as you pointed out yourself, many people port or devlop open source software for Windows. So what exactly is your point here?
"Finally, the price you pay for Microsoft Office is worth the money, if your time is worth anything." Ouch, sounds like the latest MS marketing blurb and no, though my time is worth a lot, MS Office certainly isn't worth the money for me, sorry kiddo.
4. Linux isn't secure "And frankly, applying patches in Windows is easier than in Linux. Linux is pretty easy, but Windows is still ahead, I'd say. Argue all you want. But a properly configured Windows box will successfully apply patches to itself better than a Linux one will. At least for me. And if you disagree, just know that most users don't know how to configure Linux like you do, and so your opinion doesn't matter to 98% of the computer users out there." Jesus... Press on the little update notification on your panel and have _all_ your apps updated. Now that's incredibly hard, you are right.
About your other drivel. You are aware of sudo and acls, aren't you? And you are aware that you can share folders on modern linux distros by simply clicking, just like you described for windows?
5. Linux is more expensive "For the common user who just wants to be productive, and just wants their computer to work the way they want, Windows is faster, and faster means cheaper!"
Please show me the study that a) supports your conclusion b) finally shows me who this common user is
To sum it up, your blog entry is probably one of the dumbest things I read recently. Not one good point, only senseless drivel.
But the worst thing is that a tongue in cheek article, that sets out to debunk some myths about linux let you into a francy that drove you to write your stupid blog post and the proudly anounce it on/.
Relax kid, nobody's going to take your Windows away from you, even if some prefer an other OS.
Ooops, wait, the ipod seems to appeal to a much larger userbase than those who you like to call Apple-fanoys [sic!] so why shouldn't this be the case with this device?
Seriously, I think combining an ipod with a mobile phone just makes too much sense not to do it.
And considering that mobile phones for many people have become life style articles and the ipod itself is one of the most successful life style articles, I think this could be a hughe success.
Sorry, I don't know if your post was intended to be funny, or simply a troll, but the kernel is just Linux and nobody ever claimed otherwise, least of all Stallman.
Notice that I wrote the purpose of these studies should be, not is.
I don't doubt for a minute that the studies MS likes to cite in its Get the FUD campaign do a lot of things, but certainly don't try to find out what really "works best for the job".
"So Linux is open for modification and distribution..... as long as Linus feels that you aren't harming his trademark?"
Nope, Linux is still absolutely open for modification and distribution. As long as you follow the GPL you can do everything you want with it.
The only thing you can't do without getting a license is to use the name Linux for your bussiness. How some people can think that this is a bad thing is beyond me.
"Add to the above - 999 out of every 1000 new desktop computers will ship with Vista pre-installed when it is released. The deals have been in place for a long time. This is even before Microsoft spends $1 on Vista marketing."
And that is different from the situation today in what way exactly?
Oh, it isn't. MS has had a monopoly on the desktop for years now and it has been using this monopoly to get a foothold in other markets for years now too, but still OSX and Linux stick around.
So apart from your pretty marketing babble, your post doesn't make any sense.
""Year of the Linux desktop" or whatever. Isn't that a dupe and troll in itself? It's been repeated over and over again, and yet never happened."
That simply isn't true, no matter how often people repeat it. Actually, it has grown quite significantly in market share (remember, some studies give Linux on the desktop the same market share as OSX) and as anyone following Linux developement would know, the desktop experience modern distributions offer has been getting dramatically better over the years.
"You got lots of good stuff, but when your average linux-distro starts to break down, when stuff doesn't work automagicly, when hardware detetction fails and so on... Most users (and by most users I also mean powerusers) will have a really hard time fixing stuff, if they even manage to fix it at all. Not all of us are geeks who grew up with a keyboard."
Sorry, but that's not a very convincing argument. If the shit hits the fan, then the shit hits the fan and that's true for any OS out there. Ever tried to fix a broken Windows install? It sure isn't something your average users wouls be able to manage.
Am I the only one that thinks that article doesn't make too much sense?
I fail to see how vista, even if it weren't very convincing, will help linux getting on the desktop. All a bad windows release will lead to in the short tearm is not many people buying Vist, but staying with their curren OS, which is some kind of Windows in most cases.
And people who really care about monad not being included are people who would consider running linux anyway, but they only make a small percentage of the market.
Further, I'm convinced that Linux will not make large inroads into the private desktop in the near future, not because Linux isn't good enough, but simply because Windows is much to entrenched in this market.
Corporate and gouvernment desktops are an other story though and we'll see a lot of things happening there in the future, I'm sure.
This is one of the funniest projects I've seen in a long time.
I know that people were sayint that NetBSD runs on everything but your toaster, but that they would actually take the time to prove those naysayers wrong. Great.
Well, I'm sure many slashdotters are quite familiar with doing certain things by hand and probably would agree that it can be kinda fun, but doing/. itself by hand, no, doesn't sound to great imho.
I really don't know why the parent was moderated flamebait.
Sure, claiming that using MS almost guarantees that you'll get hacked certainly is a bit trollish, but there is a certain irony if someone who recently switched to MS talks about Linux lacking reliability and predictablity, isn't there?
"Haven't you heard? There is no USSR." Haven't you heard? This doesn't matter as Russia is the entety that is the legal heir to the USSR when it comes to things like the ABM treaties.
"Treaties which ban entirely-defensive efforts are certainly not in our interest." They are not? So why did the US sign them in the first place? Oh, and did it ever occur to you that even things you might consider "entirely-defensive efforts" can seem to the other guys as aggressive as they totally shift the balance of power when it comes to weapons capabilities?
Just wanted to point out that China, Russia and some EU nations agree with your assessment. Leaving space weapons up to the US though isn't an option for these countries, I'm sure you'll understand that.
Stating that "we really don't want to get a late start in that race" is a good principle to follow, especially considering that the US already prescribed to it, all these nations will start developing space weapons immidiately.
Oh wait, look what we got us into, it's a space arms race.
Unfortunately, just when it all really started, some university students decided they didn't need space weapons and would simply use commercial airliners as weapons of mass destruction. Now isn't that nasty of them...
Slashdot Mirror
"As long as the Linux guru community responds to honest feedback on the problems of their precious OS with such vile hatred and criticism, converts are going to be put out and go back to "friendly Windows."
/., what is?
Now if this isn't a time tested argument here on
1. Write something stupid and false
2. Get called on it
3. Start to whine that with all those evil people around Linux will never be a success.
4. Profit
It's really getting boring.
But in a way your reaction is also hilarious, as you are the guy who reacted to a tongue in cheek artilce about Linux not being so bad after all with a lengthy blog entry full of factual inacuracies, unfounded assumptions and name calling.
That you of all people should now complain about "vile hatred and criticism" without even noticing the irony is incredible.
1. Linux is too complicated
/. about a million times, but as you don't seem to be aware of it:
/.
"Suppose I install Gnome as default and want to install KDE and use that as the default. How easy is that? Well, every time I try, I have to search through several configuration files with 100s of lines to find the one that specifies the default GUI, and then it often doesn't even work."
Ehm, install it and choose KDE as the default session the next time you see a login screen. Not really hard.
2. Linux is too complicated
"How many patches must you apply to SuSE right after install for all the security fixes? Dozens. Windows? Dozens. Hmmm... Seems about even there. To be safe, you ought to be behind a firewall in either case. I've never found a recent Linux distro that didn't have patches ready to install as soon as I finished installing to OS."
Jesus...
For starters having to download security updates doesn't really have that much to do with what the guy you are answering wrote and with ease of setting an OS up.
Second, this has been discussed right here on
Comparing Suse, which comes with thousands of programs with Windows, which comes with barely anything and then pointing out that you also have to download updates for Suse is pretty dumb, as you compare Apples and Oranges here.
3. Linux doesn't have enough applications
"Let's compare apples to apples here. Windows is an OS, not a set of applications."
Why now and not before?
"You Linux fanatics get on Microsoft for bundling apps with their OS"
Small correction, most of the time it's not us Linux fantics, whoever this may be, but law enforcement agencies that get on MS for abusing their monopoly.
"Windows as an OS isn't inferior just because your open source app doesn't run on it. If you are so big on choices and freedom, why don't you write your app to run on both? "
Well, everyone is free to choose to take the source code and port it to windows and as you pointed out yourself, many people port or devlop open source software for Windows. So what exactly is your point here?
"Finally, the price you pay for Microsoft Office is worth the money, if your time is worth anything."
Ouch, sounds like the latest MS marketing blurb and no, though my time is worth a lot, MS Office certainly isn't worth the money for me, sorry kiddo.
4. Linux isn't secure
"And frankly, applying patches in Windows is easier than in Linux. Linux is pretty easy, but Windows is still ahead, I'd say. Argue all you want. But a properly configured Windows box will successfully apply patches to itself better than a Linux one will. At least for me. And if you disagree, just know that most users don't know how to configure Linux like you do, and so your opinion doesn't matter to 98% of the computer users out there."
Jesus...
Press on the little update notification on your panel and have _all_ your apps updated. Now that's incredibly hard, you are right.
About your other drivel. You are aware of sudo and acls, aren't you?
And you are aware that you can share folders on modern linux distros by simply clicking, just like you described for windows?
5. Linux is more expensive
"For the common user who just wants to be productive, and just wants their computer to work the way they want, Windows is faster, and faster means cheaper!"
Please show me the study that a) supports your conclusion b) finally shows me who this common user is
To sum it up, your blog entry is probably one of the dumbest things I read recently. Not one good point, only senseless drivel.
But the worst thing is that a tongue in cheek article, that sets out to debunk some myths about linux let you into a francy that drove you to write your stupid blog post and the proudly anounce it on
Relax kid, nobody's going to take your Windows away from you, even if some prefer an other OS.
Ooops, wait, the ipod seems to appeal to a much larger userbase than those who you like to call Apple-fanoys [sic!] so why shouldn't this be the case with this device?
Seriously, I think combining an ipod with a mobile phone just makes too much sense not to do it.
And considering that mobile phones for many people have become life style articles and the ipod itself is one of the most successful life style articles, I think this could be a hughe success.
because you are desparately trying to start a flamewar?
I can't really understand why so many people have a problem with the current policy and the policy changes.
What exactly is wrong with refining the development process?
Sorry, I don't know if your post was intended to be funny, or simply a troll, but the kernel is just Linux and nobody ever claimed otherwise, least of all Stallman.
Notice that I wrote the purpose of these studies should be, not is.
I don't doubt for a minute that the studies MS likes to cite in its Get the FUD campaign do a lot of things, but certainly don't try to find out what really "works best for the job".
Ehm, the purpose of these studies is, or at least should be, to find out which one "works best for the job", so I fail to really see your point.
Just a thought.
Hope this helps.
P.S.: Yes, I know you can use the Windows Boot Manager to boot Linux, but frankly not many people do, because its a major pita to say the least.
you insensitive clod!
"So Linux is open for modification and distribution..... as long as Linus feels that you aren't harming his trademark?"
Nope, Linux is still absolutely open for modification and distribution. As long as you follow the GPL you can do everything you want with it.
The only thing you can't do without getting a license is to use the name Linux for your bussiness. How some people can think that this is a bad thing is beyond me.
I agree.
I just wanted to add that I really think that openusability is a great project and really needed.
Rock on guys!
Could you provide us some examples of the innovations in OSX?
Thanks.
"Add to the above - 999 out of every 1000 new desktop computers will ship with Vista pre-installed when it is released. The deals have been in place for a long time. This is even before Microsoft spends $1 on Vista marketing."
And that is different from the situation today in what way exactly?
Oh, it isn't. MS has had a monopoly on the desktop for years now and it has been using this monopoly to get a foothold in other markets for years now too, but still OSX and Linux stick around.
So apart from your pretty marketing babble, your post doesn't make any sense.
""Year of the Linux desktop" or whatever. Isn't that a dupe and troll in itself? It's been repeated over and over again, and yet never happened."
That simply isn't true, no matter how often people repeat it. Actually, it has grown quite significantly in market share (remember, some studies give Linux on the desktop the same market share as OSX) and as anyone following Linux developement would know, the desktop experience modern distributions offer has been getting dramatically better over the years.
"You got lots of good stuff, but when your average linux-distro starts to break down, when stuff doesn't work automagicly, when hardware detetction fails and so on... Most users (and by most users I also mean powerusers) will have a really hard time fixing stuff, if they even manage to fix it at all. Not all of us are geeks who grew up with a keyboard."
Sorry, but that's not a very convincing argument. If the shit hits the fan, then the shit hits the fan and that's true for any OS out there. Ever tried to fix a broken Windows install? It sure isn't something your average users wouls be able to manage.
Am I the only one that thinks that article doesn't make too much sense?
I fail to see how vista, even if it weren't very convincing, will help linux getting on the desktop. All a bad windows release will lead to in the short tearm is not many people buying Vist, but staying with their curren OS, which is some kind of Windows in most cases.
And people who really care about monad not being included are people who would consider running linux anyway, but they only make a small percentage of the market.
Further, I'm convinced that Linux will not make large inroads into the private desktop in the near future, not because Linux isn't good enough, but simply because Windows is much to entrenched in this market.
Corporate and gouvernment desktops are an other story though and we'll see a lot of things happening there in the future, I'm sure.
"Has anyone succeeded in resolving their problem of which OS to use based on this insightful article?"
Sure.
If I understand this outstanding article correctly it all boils down to word.
This is one of the funniest projects I've seen in a long time.
I know that people were sayint that NetBSD runs on everything but your toaster, but that they would actually take the time to prove those naysayers wrong. Great.
Btw., I want one of those.
Could you adopt me?
Judging from your post and you sig I get the impression you really, really dislike spellcheckers for some reason.
Btw., you can do more with computers than just write text, really.
Well, I'm sure many slashdotters are quite familiar with doing certain things by hand and probably would agree that it can be kinda fun, but doing /. itself by hand, no, doesn't sound to great imho.
"Because....prepare to be shocked....sometimes leaders do bad things."
So that means the US should simply break old contracts if they don't like them any more?
I really don't know why the parent was moderated flamebait.
Sure, claiming that using MS almost guarantees that you'll get hacked certainly is a bit trollish, but there is a certain irony if someone who recently switched to MS talks about Linux lacking reliability and predictablity, isn't there?
"Haven't you heard? There is no USSR."
Haven't you heard? This doesn't matter as Russia is the entety that is the legal heir to the USSR when it comes to things like the ABM treaties.
"Treaties which ban entirely-defensive efforts are certainly not in our interest."
They are not? So why did the US sign them in the first place?
Oh, and did it ever occur to you that even things you might consider "entirely-defensive efforts" can seem to the other guys as aggressive as they totally shift the balance of power when it comes to weapons capabilities?
Just wanted to point out that China, Russia and some EU nations agree with your assessment. Leaving space weapons up to the US though isn't an option for these countries, I'm sure you'll understand that.
Stating that "we really don't want to get a late start in that race" is a good principle to follow, especially considering that the US already prescribed to it, all these nations will start developing space weapons immidiately.
Oh wait, look what we got us into, it's a space arms race.
Unfortunately, just when it all really started, some university students decided they didn't need space weapons and would simply use commercial airliners as weapons of mass destruction. Now isn't that nasty of them...