Linux on CNN 182
Red sent us a link to a Linux article on CNN.
Take it with a grain of salt- the author makes some good
points and tries to slice through the hype. Dwells on
a trying to explain what source code is. He basically
dismisses Linux as hype and buzzwords.
flawed but good (Score:1)
it's going to be an uphill battle
The problem you site is part of the damage done by the Microsoft.Madison_Avenue crowd and their "computer as toaster" hype. Instead of promoting computer literacy, Windows and other "point-n-clickers" have dumbed down users. There will always be folks who will refuse to learn to do things the right way. However, the net effect of widespread adoption of Linux and the BSDs is going to be an overall increase in computing proficiency. The next generation of programmers and admins are going to hit the marketplace with a much better understanding of what makes systems work and how to solve problems. Corporate IT departments are going to begin to expect more from IT workers, be they programmers, admins or users. Knowing VB/VBA (or whatever MS replaces it with) isn't going to count for much five years from now.
and you're missing his point. (Score:1)
We're overlooking the most important aspect of all this: take the average chucklehead Ziff-Davis "writer" who whines about how hard it is to install Linux and plunk him down in front of a brand spankin' new PC with a clean hard drive, no partitions. Hand him a Windows CD and tell him to call you when he's finished installing it. You'd better hand him a fifty-cent piece before you leave, because by the time he gets it installed a phone call will cost fifty cents.
The point is, Linux is no more difficult to install than Windows. If PCs with Linux pre-installed were readily available, installation issues wouldn't even be on the radar. Give the average Windows user a PC with any Linux distro and KDE or GNOME installed and he'll have no problem learning to use it. Maybe we should spend more time trying to figure out ways to get PC vendors to start shipping pre-installed boxes instead of worrying about how hard Linux is to install.
Let's see.... (Score:1)
I go buy a copy of SuSE.....
Insert boot floppy......
Insert live filesystem CD......
Power up.....
Select option to run filesystem off CD...
Get login prompt.........
Pass out from exhaustion/frustration......
The main thing people freak over is disk partitioning. SuSE and IIRC, RedHat current disto's can automagically partition the drive for you. Some enterprising vendor should bundle linux CD's with purchase of new HD.
the Home Improvement analogy (Score:1)
I often use the automobile industry one myself, but that addresses a different aspect of what's happening.
Part of the reason that DIY became mainstream for homeowners was TV shows like "this old house" et al which gave people information about construction thereby demystifying it. There's plenty of people who'd rather pay a contractor to do the work but there are also plenty of people who can _afford_ to pay a contractor but still prefer to get down and dirty.
I'd also like to suggest that more important for Joe User is the availability of documentation than source code. Sure, sometimes the HOW-TO's are a little dated, but the info contained therein is still _useful_. Contrast this with the value of the "manual" that comes with, oh, lets say MS Exchange server, which fits more into the category of "brochure". In order to get any real info you need to spend $$ on a support contract and even then it's painfully time consuming to get answers that at best provide a course of action without any reason as to how or why things work (or don't work as the case may be)
No Subject Given (Score:1)
As stated, with regard to system administration, by Jamie Zawinski of mozilla fame, who
He was talking gratis there, not libre. Nothing is free in that sense. Everytime I see that quote I wonder how long ago he said it.
I knew you could.... (Score:1)
Not to mention... (Score:1)
...all the money you have to fork over for third-party tools to do basic things like file system quotas or real login scripts under NT.
Another clueless journalist (Score:1)
Inadept journalists will be part of this country's downfall. Due to the mass media there are still people who believe that this country banned "assault weapons" in 1994.
There are still people who believe that Bill Clinton's failed impeachment was "all about sex".
There are still people who believe that the American civil war was just about slavery.
There are still people who believe that the police are the "good guys".
This moron compared source code to blueprints or a movie script. Source code is more like bricks and mortar. A compiler and linker put it together.
Does he not know that in many situations where software is custom developed, a part of the agreement is that a neutral third party must hold a copy of all of the source code in case the supplier goes belly up?
Source code is more important than the compiled executables in terms of the big picture. If someone could decompile all of M$' source code to Win2K and format it in a readable fashion, M$ would sue everyone from that person's kindergarten teacher to the clerk at Starbucks who served French Mocha Blend to him/her that week.
Just like every other shift in the computing paradigm, Linux will take time to mature. 30 years ago you would have been laugned at if you said that eventually every home (or close to it) in te US would have a computer. Where are we today?
20 years ago you'd have been laughed at if you told someone that the richest man in the world would be the CEO of a software company instead of the chairman of some media/movie/oil company. Where are we today?
A decade ago you'd have been laughed at if you told someone that you could buy off of the shelf PCs for $150,000 and link them together and match the performance of a 5.5 million dollar supercomputer. Where are we today?
Why do so many people seem in-fucking-capable of getting it?
LK
neither bad nor good (Score:1)
He didn't really say anything bad (except about windows 2000)...
Wanna know what Linux REALLY is? (Score:1)
Hmmm...
Maybe Linux is the final nail in the coffin of Windows -- the guiding light that will show the world that it doesn't have to blindly follow Microsoft into the depths of despair. Perhaps, as more and more Open Source software makes headlines, the world will slip away from the all-encompassing marketing-monster that is Bill, and into a world of better software by better authors...
Or, maybe Linux is just a fad -- the zealous obsession of a bunch of college nerds who think that squeezing every last drop of performance out of their aging hardware will somehow make up for the fact that they aren't gettin' any...
Or, maybe Linux is the unified alternative for the new age. Perhaps, as it is ported to more and more hardware platforms, and as desktop environments such as KDE and Gnome develop, Linux will succeed in uniting the second-stringers (who are currently using OS/2, Macs, Amigas, BeOS, etc.) into a force that can stand toe-to-toe and head-to-head against the Gates of Hell...
Or, maybe Linux is a plot by a pinko-commie bastard from Finland to convince red-blooded American programmers that they shouldn't expect to be paid for their hard work, and to instead code "for the good of all mankind", all in an attempt to begin the transition to the New World Order...
Personally, I tend to agree that it's just software...
... but, unlike Windows, it's damn good software.
Re: linux on CNN (Score:1)
well this actually showed up in Computer World from one of the "editorial staff" that can't keep his mind straight on anything anyways... I think they still don't understand the linux community and are getting on that "bandwagon" tooo late from most other weekly news mags anyways... heck CNN is a buzzword and hype afterall isn't it? heh...
pennacook
Unfortunatly (Score:1)
If linux is to become 'the next BIG OS' like many people are saying it will be, people like this guy are going to be most people's only source of information. The average user doesn't read slashdot but does watch CNN, so let's not be too hard on him. We should try to convince him of the greatness of Linux, but if we flame him, he'll probably fight us and the last this Linux needs is bad press.
Those Idiots (Score:1)
Those Idiots. That "Journalist" probably didn't even take himself to Linux Expo or whatever.
All he said was junk. if he really actually used it he would probably change his mind.
Another clueless slashdotter(yeah, YOU) (Score:1)
>>Read in this context, the article doesn't say a bad thing about Linux.
He does severely downplay Linux's importance and potential. Linux has already started to change the way people think about software and computing.
Do you think that Windoze CE will ever power a car MP3 player?
So I ask my question again.
LK
You're comments aren't free? (Score:1)
So you're making proprietory comments about free software? that's funny!
TedC
don't be so grumpy... (Score:1)
Well, I don't know about opinions, but it should be obvious that a person's thoughts and ideas are expressed in the software they write.
TedC
flawed logic. (Score:1)
The people who have Car X also cannot unlock the door to the car. They have to break the window to get out. The thing is, they don't want to get out. To get out would deprive them of the gloves (data) they have stuck in the glovebox. Until the Car Y people come up with keys to the Car X car and a way to convert the gloves in the Car X glovebox, to a Car Y glovebox, Car X will always dominate.
(Anyway, data is the key. Until, MS Office 97/2000 documents can be handled easily in Linux/BSD/whatever, there will always be Car X.)
The secret of Linux (Score:1)
And, he has quite the consumer mentality. Every time I've sent a patch upstream, the author has incorporated it into the next version...
Like W*ndows 2000 isn't hype and buzzwords (Score:1)
flawed but good (Score:1)
In other words: the mainstream has a chronic case of Attention Deficit Disorder.
...and that my friends, is the (potentially) major limiting factor to the open source trend: It expects mainstream programmers to become *more* competent.
Put another way, open source is partially an attempt to reverse a bad trend: instead of making programming easier for baboons, make programming easier for competent people who want to collaborate.
Think it will work? We live in a world where Visual Basic is the #1-used language and VB programmers outnumber UNIX programmers. Conservatively, (imho) 1/2 of those VB programmers are hopelessly incompetent.... it's going to be an uphill battle, but it sure is fun!
Not hype and buzzwords (Score:1)
I had no idea it was just hype. Someone should tell Linus and Alan so they can give it up.
Maybe I should quit using it and use Windows 2000. Ooops, that's just hype, too. I could get an IMac---no, that's hype. Okay, I'll get an Amiga, no, there's hype about their comeback. WAIT! An Apple IIGS, no one gives a shit about those anymore. I can no go live in a world free of hype. Where can I get a IIGS?
You're comments aren't free? (Score:1)
If it wasn't copyrighted, it'd be public domain, which would allow anyone to take the source, make proprietary changes, and sell it 100% closed.
Read the GPL, and see for yourself.
--
What is source code, in 3 sentences? (Score:1)
"Blueprint" is the closest they've come, which just doesn't make the point well enough.
So; who can summarise what source code is in the fewest words, without making it unclear?
--
somebody needs convincing (Score:1)
- themability vs functionality. Which functionality is missing in Gnome (as opposed to simply being broken in your install or not-yet-implemented? I already said: Gnome is unfinished. I contend that it is not, however, fundamentally flawed.)
- Gnome wrecks most distributions and breaks other apps. Most of Gnome's dependencies were satisfied by libs in my distribution! (libpng and friends). I've been running with zillions of different GTK+ versions on my system for months with no ill effects. Heck, I've been running with ten or fifteen versions of the Gnome libraries (generated from a compile script that compiles stuff overnight) In addition, I could now install debs of Gnome. I haven't, just because my CVS compile works perfectly well for me. This is much more significant than RPMs being available, since (as has been observed) RPMs generally consist of a bunch of random files thrown together into an archive. I can't think of any
- Modularity. First of all--AFAIK, you can configure gnome-libs to not link against esd if you so please. Again as far as I know, the same goes for other libraries. If you don't want to install libjpeg, don't.
Given the tone of your post, though, I suspect you're a 'true believer' and attempting to bring up anything so crass and propogandistic as facts is useless, so I won't even mention anything about all the Gnome developers who don't get RedHat paychecks. Oh well.
Daniel
Who knew it was so easy to be a journalist? (Score:1)
Steve (who writes reviews of Linux applications for his web site, despite being perfectly capable of writing code)
rubbish. (Score:1)
CNN Where are you? (Score:1)
Hey you dumbass!!!
The secret to Linux/Open Source is that there are no secrets. Secrets are something that those mf's at Microsoft bundle up and sell. Yes, nothing more than a secret. Good software can be written buy Internet communities and not be a secret. I suspect that his motivation for writing the article is more than an unbiased point of view.
Actually, he's (partially) right (Score:1)
As far as support personell go, a hospital in Anchorage, AK is looking at moving to Network Computers because they can no longer afford to support 1300 PC desktops. They're coming to look at our setup, since X-Terminals are just NCs. (Our X-Terminals have their own JVM.) In a network environment, it takes more people to handle a distributed NT network than it does a comparably-priced Unix or Linux network. So your support costs are greater for NT, as well as your upfront costs.
Plus, he underestimates how different Free (Open Source) Software is as a development model from the other models that came before. Sure, IBM distributed source code; but it wasn't available to just *any*one. And nobody could contribute back to the source. Frank Hayes shows his lack of imagination; he's a stodgy Big Iron man who's followed the growth of PCs from a Microsoft perspective. He's a decent enough reporter; he just lacks imagination and understanding.
*I* am a commercial IT person, and Linux is more than just software; it is freedom. I am in a position to make my own decisions, because my business superiors realize they pay me big bucks to make the correct decisions for them. Because of that, I use Linux where possible, because it *is* less expensive in both support and direct costs.
- Tony
Myth bashing (Score:1)
My point? The "difficult to install" myth is now just that-- it's a myth. "Difficult to use" may still be true, but the install is painless. My S.O. could do it, and she *hates* computers.
I sill wouldn't expect her to set up Gnome or anything, but the next Red Hat distribution should solve that problem. And I'm working on the "lack of applications" myth. Are you?
And I think this takes care of another myth-- that "the computer elite" that develops Linux doesn't care about ease-of-use. We do. We've been working on an easy-to-use and powerful desktop; the KDE team is already there. (Personally, I think Gnome has more potential; that's why I develop for Gnome. But KDE is already easy-to-use, and well along the development path.)
So. Linux is now easy-to-install; we have lots of applications; and now we turn our attention to easy-to-use applications, which is the *only* Linux shortcoming in the personal-use sphere. (In server space, we still need a journalling filesystem, and a transparent clustering technology. Beowolf is not transparent, though it is powerful.)
Wait a minute... (Score:1)
the Home Improvement analogy (Score:1)
Back in the old days, if you wanted to build a house, you gathered up all the stuff yourself
and built the thing. As communities formed, houses got built by enlisting the help of all your
neighbors "barn-raising" style. Then mass market set in and "cookie-cutter" houses became the norm.
The pendulum eventually swung back, semi-custom homes became all the rage and fix-er-upers became
a booming business. Home Depot, Home Base, and Builder's Square became a booming multi-billion
dollar business providing home buyers with free advice to lure people into purchasing the raw
materials for houses from them. Upgrading your house became both a hobby and a national obsession.
Back in the old days, if you wanted to build a computer, you gathered up all the stuff yourself
and built the thing. As communities formed, computers got built by enlisting the help of all
your neighbors "plug-board" style. Then mass market set in and "cookie-cutter" computers became
the norm. The pendulum eventually swung back, build-to-order computers became all the rage and
upgrades and free-software became a booming business. Red Hat, Cygnus, and VA research became
a booming multi-million dollar business providing computer buyers with free advice to lure people
into purchasing the raw materials for computers from them... to be continued...
Wow! (Score:1)
--
As long as each individual is facing the TV tube alone, formal freedom poses no threat to privilege.
and you're missing his point. (Score:1)
Then Linux is as good as dead already.
People must have a sufficient reason for learning how to use a new tool. Those of us who particpate in these forums take for granted this drive inside of us. We'll spend all day, all week, or all month to get something to work. For the average Joe, if he can't figure it out within a few minutes, it ain't worth it. Average Joe doesn't know how to set the time on his VCR but knows how to insert a tape and press play.
That's where the ultimate utility of a computer has always been dreamed about and will continue to be steered toward. Why is the web browser the most revolutionary piece of software in the past 10 years? Because you don't need an e-mail client, FTP client, or gopher, or WAIS, or any of the other rubbish. You point and click in what has become a fairly consistant interface across different implementations. That's a huge step forward from the hodge-podge of solutions that were around before.
Microsoft can be villified for a great many things, but for promoting the "myth" that a computer can be as easy to use as a toaster? They're doing nothing more elaborate than parroting back what people say they want. And despite the caws and screeches from the peanut gallery, they do a decent job of inching ever so slowly toward that goal.
"Open Source" and "free" are quaint and cosy buzz-words for the new hacker community, but they don't go far in a world that wants the results from a product that allows them to do what they want to do in the easiest and most painless way possible. At this moment, only Microsoft (and possibly Apple) come close to catering to the consumer market on THEIR terms.
If the Linux community ever decides to do that, then there'll be real reason for Microsoft to be scared. In a big way.
Crackhead Writer (Score:1)
Well, some members of the audience actually saw the parenthetical note the author put after that comment, which was
but I guess not everybody did.Very nice! (Score:1)
These *pop* writers who casually throw around words like 'wild-eyed' and 'anarchist' without really expaining themselves, don't deserve much respect anyway. But I guess the target audience for CNN are the clueless masses who couldn't think critically if their life depended on it.
This is what I wrote (not the original poster) (Score:1)
--
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 20:27:44 +0100 (CET)
From: Bert Lindner
To: Frank Hayes of ComputerWorld/CNN
Subject: Source: the recipe
Hi Frank,
I strongly diagree on your 'no-big-deal' opinion of Linux and Open Source,
I think it's one of the most interesting phenomena in the history of
computing, comparable only with things like the Internet. But then I would
probably qualify as a 'techie' so I'm in the wrong camp, I would
'obviously' think so. I don't think the hype (there _is_ hype) is
necessary, but that doesn't make it less important.
A good way to explain computer source code I think is as
a recipe
for making a computer program. Just that. I didn't make that up myself, I
recently saw that on a web site.
Regards,
-Bert Lindner, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
PS Linux _is_ free even for corporate IT shops, but they may _choose_ to
pay somebody to provide support for them. Anyone may download and use
Linux, for personal _and_ business use.
Actually, he's right (Score:1)
Bill is the sort of guy they can relate to, or at least think they can relate to: a tough-as-nails, suit-wearing, golf-playing, short-haired WASP who looks good in annual reports, and clawed his way up from the bottom to make it to where he is. No one ever points out to them that he never wrote anything worthwhile, much less Windows, has almost no status (except as flamebait) in the hacker (in the RMS sense) community, and is probably given large doses of Valium before interviews so he doesn't start rocking, mumbling, or scratching himself. It's only Big Government who doesn't like him, (like the IRS, right?) and all the other guys really just wish they had that kind of money. (As if a couple more billion would buy Steve Jobs a better wardrobe, or Scott Mc Neely a nicer collar for Network, right?)
CNN caters to these people.
Linus and Richard and Eric are people they can't understand: they like working, for chrissake! So of course they're going to think, if it's free, it's not worth anything, and even if it was, it carries a hidden pricetag. The abovementioned aren't exactly starving: so they're doing it for the money, after all. They act like the hippies they stopped being fifteen years ago and dismissed as being incompetants: so of course anything they do is just MTV hype and hot air.
I'm glad I don't have to deal with them without a drink in my hand.
flawed logic. (Score:1)
There are two cars on the market, car X, and car Y. car X costs an arm and a leg. car Y is free if you are willing to go to the factory and pick up the parts and assemble it in your garage (the instructions to do so are also free and comes with it.) You can also purchase car Y for a small fee from car dealers who assembled it themsselves and provide some basic support.
Car X needs alot of gas to even get out of the driveway, not to mention you constantly pay the manufacture to fix (upgraded) problems that shouldn't have been there in the first place, plus it can't drive for long periods of time without suddenly going off the road and killing who ever is in the passenger seat. You also need alot of mechanics at hand to fix it when things go wrong. It can only drive on certain roads, and tend to not see or ignore other cars on the road. It comes without some of the parts that you need to make the car work, but its okay cause there are tons of stores that will sell those parts to you for a "small fee."
Car Y needs very little gas to run on, and comes with all the parts and tools that the car can ever need. there are few stores that sell parts for the car, but you can order parts from other car owners who will give it to you for free. It can drive for long distances without having to pull over and give its system a rest, and can drive on almost any road, and if it can't, someone somewhere is working on a way to get it to go down that road. when it does breakdown, it can be fixed remotely, hell, you can even drive the thing remotly. It gets along with all the other cars on the road, and does not try to run them off the road (like some other car that i shall not mention).
Now, because alot of people already own Car X, and they wasted a ton of money in buying and maintaining car x, it will actually cost them more over a period of time to stick with car x than to switch to car y. If they cannot see this fact, then they have been riding in the passenger seat of that car for too long.
Linux is Software ? (Score:1)
Thanks Captain Obvious
"peer-reviewed software" (Score:1)
Lame. (Score:1)
Who knew it was so easy to be a journalist? (Score:1)
Another clueless slashdotter (Score:1)
I find myself asking the question you just asked all the time.
logan
It is software like any OS! (Score:1)
I liked the article quite a bit. Critical, pointing out it's just software. It is considered good or bad by its quality as such.
As for myself, I've done some of that kicking of a bunch of Linux tires and haven't yet found too big lacks. That doesn't say the system as a whole wouldn't have its weaknesses - one still can't honestly tell ordinary dummies to use it.
As for the total cost of upkeep being the same as for NT, I do disagree, but that can be argued upon. Endlessly, so far.
Well, quite a long "me too"
Tough Crowd (Score:1)
"...The mass media did a pretty good job describing the Internet and even Java for ordinary businesspeople. But Linux baffled them..."
His closing statement makes it even more obvious that he has a clue. He wants Linux supporters to explain to the suits why they should give Linux any attention. Don't confuse them by showing them how to compile a kernel. They don't care. Money talks. If they can save some, they'll love Linux.
No Subject Given (Score:1)
On a less flippant note... (Score:1)
So, what did you write? (Score:1)
I like his point of view (Score:1)
He raises points like the fact that Linux is free and that the source code is available but to Joe User, does this really matter? Does he understand that this "feature" of Linux makes it better than other OS's because of all those knowledgeable persons that contributed to it? A lot of non-tech type friends I talked to are convinced that they are the ones who should write kernel patches.
There is a lot of media coverage of Linux lately, and a lot of it focuses on the fact that everybody can modify the source code.
Our mission: education! Let people know that they DON'T HAVE to tweak the source code.
M.
No Subject Given (Score:1)
This part in particular looked just like something I've seen mentioned frequently in anti-linux FUD stuff:
Linux isn't even free -- not for
corporate IT shops, anyhow. Add
up the costs of installation,
testing, support, training and the
political infighting that comes
with any new technology in an IT
shop, and your total cost of
running Linux is about the same
as NT, Unix or anything else. The
"free" sticker price is a tiny
fraction of that cost.
Well, true... kinda. I don't know about you, but the price makes a big difference to me... can't beat free. For corporate shops, I just plain don't agree that the price of owning linux will be anywhere near the price of owning NT.. you've got big licences to pay, and getting bigger all the time. Plus you've got a lot more downtime, that's gotta cost. Well.... hmm, ok, so I guess the best thing to do is try'n educate this guy, and clear up some of his.... confusion
(Oops, I just read the advice about not starting new threads, but, oh well, it's my first time soo...)
-----------
I'm supposed to write something clever here but I couldn't think of anything clever so I wrote this
This reminds me... (Score:1)
It was more along the lines of "...I can envision a day when every that can be patented will have been." Not much better, but less egregious than what's being thrown around.
Re: Linux is Hype and Buzzwords? (Score:1)
--
Paranoid
Something good about Microsoft (Score:1)
For workstations in the corporate environment I prefer NT workstations to anything else availible. It's easier to hire some Joe Schmoe off the street who knows his way around the NT interface than it is to find someone who knows one of the 30 different X windows interfaces we have out there.
I say, Unix for backoffice, NT for workstations. Lock them down and chain the users to their desks. Choice is bad. Conformity is good! Resistance is Futile! EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE! EXTER...
Oh... sorry...
So much coverage (Score:1)
Natas
www.mp3.com/pedophagia
Why is source code important? (Score:1)
From a developer's standpoint, I think the importance of source code can be summed up fairly succinctly:
This guy's a genious (Score:1)
Great great.
No Subject Given (Score:1)
By that same logic, then if my time has value, Windows is very, very expensive since it is more frustratingly time consuming than Linux by far. Linux works and works well, whereas it is a chore to reliably do anything with Windows.
Who's on crack? (Score:1)
NT - happy customers willing to pay.
Live with it!
Troll breath. Red Hat and SuSE seem to be able to find a lot of people willing to pay for Linux. Not all NT customers are happy (or I should say a lot of NT customers I know are unhappy. And even those that are happy. Well, the "Who's on crack?" might fit -- a lot of crack customers are happy as long as they are getting their stuff.
The good thing is I don't have to live with it, so deal with the fact that more and more of us are opting against Microsoft every day.
Why is source code important? (Score:1)
In the long run, the source code is crucial so that Linux will continue to exist and be supported. How many good commercial products have died an ignoble death just because the company that bought the code didn't want to enhance or support it any more? How many good products have been bought and buried so that an inferior product would be preserved from competition? This *can't* happen with Linux or with GNU.
Inevitable (Score:1)
Email the dumbass.. (Score:1)
frank_hayes@computerworld.com
Actually, he's right (Score:1)
A command line to these folks is like showing them something written in Chinese (unless you happen to read Chinese...) They live by their point n click "zero-admin" tools, auto-run CD's, and couldn't code a simple binary search algorithm in old MS-BASIC.
Speaking from experience, I've had to explain to heads of IT deptartments that a "server" is not a $10000 computer, but a stupid little IP-aware program.
They live off buzzwords like "deployment" "business-critical" "infrastructure" and can't install a screensaver without it first having to go through the corporate software evalution procedure.
If they'd quit kneeling and kow-towing at the throne of Mr. Gate's Empire, listening to the latest marketing PR as if it were the gospel....
The truth is, if they'd install tools that basically run themselves once set up properly (i.e. Linux) they'd all be out of jobs. Bob the rebooter would have to go back to the mail-room.
Corporate BS vs. Common Sense.
This reminds me... (Score:1)
"Everything that can be invented, has been invented."
This columnist should read more history. He might develop an education.
---
lay off the crackpipe (Score:1)
Excuse me? Maybe add up all the support costs and the SUPPORT COSTS are the same as anything else, but I didn't see any $600 copies of server software or absurd licensing costs in Linux. When was the last time somebody rolled out 200 copies of NT for $40?
Actually, he's right (Score:1)
Price/performance comparisons of the linux and NT hardware and software in this shop were at least 10 to 1 in favor of linux systems. We didn't have to pay massive licenses for the software, and it would run on hardware that NT would choke before it managed to boot. We didn't have to drive in in the middle of the night to reboot the linux boxes. We could accomplish four or five times as much on half the hardware with linux. Seems like a fucking cheap os to me.
lay off the crackpipe (Score:1)
I did but don't call 1-800-RU-LEGIT...
I don't want them to know!
Linus didn't write linux. (Score:1)
Good Analogy, Actually... (Score:1)
...because people understand it instantly. Hearing something like that will immediately get even a total non-techie to realize that the "free" in "people say Linux is free" has nothing to do with monetary cost.
Of course, the real cynical ones may disagree with the assertion, but by that point, they already understand the point of the analogy.
Besides, people do say that the U.S. is free. Whether they're right or not has little to do with the validity of the analogy.
"just software" (Score:1)
"Linux is just software".
To it, I'll add: "Windows is unjust software"
Oops, the justice department beat me to it.
ARGGGH!
Linux isn't free? (Score:1)
heh. Absolutely.
hmm... mebbe whe should get him together in an enclosed space with RMS!
Now there'd be a good use for the guy!
--
- Sean
I know which one I would read! (Score:1)
While I may not do much either way in response to the second one ("While I appreciate your trying to demystify [...]"), I know that any letter that started off with, "Hey you ignorant moron, toot toot!" would be instantly chucked in the trash without my reading another word of it.
It may make the sender feel better, but would probably never even be read, let alone paid attention to by the recipient.
--
- Sean
Journalism... (Score:1)
What? You think a journalist should let "facts" get in the way of a good story?
After all, truth is what the media say it is.
Who knew it was so easy to post to Slashdot? (Score:1)
Seriously, though, S:N is better in those camps.
--C
"peer-reviewed software" (Score:1)
Heheheh... hmm... not half-jokingly, I wonder if a professional certification could be set up along these lines? It'd be a few more letters to add behind your name, and would be a clue, if professionally handled, as to the competence of a hacker.
--C
This guy's a genious (Score:1)
--C
Windows is Hype and buzzwords that crash alot (Score:1)
Pointless as his article was (Score:1)
The more everyone says the word, the more confidence people will have in it.
-----
http://www.Windows2Linux.org [windows2linux.org] (Submit your Links)
Why is source code important? (Score:1)
Source code is also a really handy way to learn programming. Download a library, compile it, flip through some of the example programs, grep through some
Am I reading the same article? (Score:1)
He is actually very unbiased in the article from a serious point and simply points out issues that we are all aware of (Linux is free, but a Red Hat CD costs $50 - nothing new or misleading there).
My suggestion, take two deep breaths, close one eye, and re-read the article completely.
Tough Crowd (Score:1)
I think he's trying to say that Linux supporters haven't done a very good job explaining why Linux is so great. For instance, its great that Linux can be modified in-house, but not every site needs that. He does point out the advantage when talking about vendor-forced upgrades, so I think he does have some clue.
The bit about costs is valid, consider the price of the computer, operating room and, most of all, IT personnel and the difference between 0 and a thousand dollars is quite insignificant.
He was trying to cut through the hype and see exactly what Linux brings to the table. Linux isn't a revolution, it's software. Open-source development may yet quality as a revolution, but I think its still early to declare victory.
Instead of seeing this as a attack, look at it as an opportunity. He is telling us where Linux advocacy is failing, lets use this to spread the word more effectively.
Tough Crowd - s/w costs are (relatively) minor (Score:1)
>of the computer, operating room and, most of all,
>IT personnel and the difference between 0 and a
>thousand dollars is quite insignificant.
Very good point. Maybe we should try to fill in some details, i.e. most of the folks here don't run big server farms for a living.
To run an office of a decent size, you should have the following server room facilities:
In an environment like this, another few grand for the OS isn't a show stopper. That's why Solaris and SCO and AIX and HPUX etc haven't been blown away by the various free *nix's.
Don't confuse the Linux workstation/firewall/router in your apartment with the email server for 10,000 people, these are two totally different worlds with totally different rules.
In big shops, folks have been moving to Free Software/Open Source because it works, not because they save a handfull of $$$ on server licenses.
I wrote the author, got reply (Score:1)
However, the major focus of his article was how media coverage had a huge Hype/Info ratio. I missed this and attempted to clarify RH Linux pricing for him. (New rule for me--always read an article twice before responding).
Mr. Hayes' response was courteous and detailed. He is not Linux clue-impaired. He made the point that my success with Linux was due to accurately evaluating, then using Linux.
He noted the article on CNN was a modified version of his original on the Computerworld site. [computerworld.com] Computerworld is IT-focused. Overall, he did a good job cautioning those who woud dismiss (or blindly embrace) Linux to use common sense.
Feedback (Score:1)
I e-mailed him and he responded very quickly.
Basically he said that he wrote that article
for compuworld or whatever, and was upset to
see CNN edit it and release it to the mainstream
because he knew it would be taken wrong by
audiences other than IT departments.
He claims it was mostly to make fun of the main
stream press and hype, but after re-reading his
article, I still have a hard time believing that.
Who knew it was so easy to be a journalist? (Score:1)
Who knew it was so easy to post to Slashdot? (Score:1)
a brain of their own start flamming Windows and
promoting Linux just because it's the c00l thing to do.
Well I like and use Linux (slackware), and I don't like
Microsoft nor their tactics, but I don't like seeing people
trash MS just because they are MS. e.g. Windows crashes: Everybody trashes MS
Linux crashes: not even a word. Yes, and Linux can also crash.
What is diferent is the philosophy (see Cathedral & Bazar by ESR)
So Make Code not War!
No Subject Given (Score:1)
Take some of your own advice [slashdot.org], scrytch.
free!=worthless, get a dictionary.
A real world observation (Score:1)
Why is source code important? (Score:1)
You have to love being able to add mod_perl, php or whatever to the server after the fact.
Another clueless journalist (Score:1)
Linus didn't write linux. (Score:1)
Linux is Hype and Buzzwords? (Score:1)
Windows?
Not really... (Score:1)
Additionally, the NT setup seems to be perpetually broken, while the UNIX network supports world-class research.
D.
Borg or Daleks? (Score:1)
Once again: Free Beer/Free Speech (Score:1)
Which is not to say that Linux is not also available gratis. That the software is available gratis (Free Beer) is a side effect inseperable from the fact that it is free (as in free speech). Some people claim that since you don't get the net bandwidth or the cd, or whatever other medium you use to obtain Linux, for free, Linux is therefore not gratis. That's ridiculous. As an example, let's say that someone is giving away free christmas trees. Just because they don't also transport the tree to your home, set it up, decorate it, and then come back after Christmas and remove it for you doesn't mean that the tree was not gratis. The same thing applies to time spent on Linux as well, it may be that you can add it to total cost of ownership, but that doesn't make it non-free.
Tongue in Cheek crap from CNN. (Score:1)
Not surprising it comes from CNN-- almost all journalists are very poor, but CNN has some that are very, very, very poor. But you must have known this already, no?
They're not writing for you, anyway. You only read it 'cause it was linked on /. Funny:
Crackhead Writer (Score:1)
Uh, okay. Last time I checked, Windows NT and other OS's also required installation, testing, support, training, ON TOP OF a hefty price tag. I believe that it definately DOES save money, and quite a bit too.
"Should you let your in-house developers make changes to the source code? (Probably not, unless you love version-control hell.) "
I don't see this as a negative, if you have competent programmers at work
"Should I really consider software written piecemeal by thousands of programmers in an anarchic development setting?"
This is funny. The author would rather run software developed by power-hungry, greedy, market orientated software giants that care little for the end user, than software written BY the end user for the end user and tested on thousands of different machines under thousands of different real-life scenarios. Go ahead, be my guest..! I'll trust Linus's decision making over the "how much richer can I be today" Gates any day.
"Linux simply isn't something TV and radio can explain to a mainstream audience in three minutes of sound bites."
Linux is not for the mainstream audience. It is for A) The techincal hacker who enjoys a complete control and customization of his/her machine. B) The moderately skilled user who WANTS to know more, and C) The network IT professionals who want to run a stable and secure network. All three of these types of people know what's going on, they are not the "mainstream home user". For the average Joe, that's what Windows is designed for.
"Frank Hayes...has been looking for a good way to explain source code for 20 years."
And this guy is writing a column on Linux? Geez!
No Subject Given (Score:1)
I would be interested to know what you consider to be "time well spent"...
This reminds me... (Score:1)
No time investment for Windows? (Score:1)
"peer-reviewed software" (Score:1)
$0.02 from a journalist who runs Linux.