Perception of Linux Among IT Undergrads 893
iconian writes: "The Linux Journal has a story on IT students and their perception of Linux. One of the funnier myths perceived to be true is that 'Microsoft's technical support is the best in the industry and is superior to that offered by the Linux community.' It just goes to show how little real world experience students have. It's a bit disturbing considering they will be the next generation of technology workers."
Maybe better not to Graduate? (Score:2, Insightful)
ps- First Post?
tech support (Score:4, Funny)
Re:tech support (Score:5, Insightful)
From a corporate perspective, IRC is very, very far from legitimate or reliable tech support. Same goes for usenet. People want a phone number that they can call and get an answer RIGHT NOW. Or if they don't get one RIGHT NOW, they want to know that a technician is working on the problem until it's solved.
There's very little of such support available in the world of Linux right now. RedHat is getting there, and LinuxCare used to be on its way.(they're gone now, right?) So yeah, in the realm of Tech Support with capital letters, MS blows linux away.
But you're right. I get answers faster through IRC and/or USENET posts than though MS tech support almost every time.
Re:tech support (Score:2)
Which they don't get from Microsoft. Except for the phone number.
Ergo the original conclusion, college kids don't have much real world experience. I think it's similar to a political campaign. Doesn't matter what "true" is; whoever hollers longest and loudest wins.
Re:tech support (Score:3, Insightful)
Most commercial software has a two-way communication between QA and support. Last I checked, the people on #linux didn't have direct and constant access to the bug-tracking databases for each and every linux application that popped up.
There are some development efforts in linux that have good 2-way communication like that - abiword, for example. But for the most part, there's nothing comparable to the relatively few players you have to deal with in the commercial world.
Re:tech support (Score:4, Interesting)
But you're right. I get answers faster through IRC and/or USENET posts than though MS tech support almost every time
My $0.02 - We had a problem with Services For Mac on a win2k server - it was causing the SYSTEM process to go to 100% and stay there. Logged a call, paid the $200. - Got first level support on the phone withing in 10 minutes - Useless as tits on a bull. They basicly search the KB for you. - Then the problem was escalated to regional support.
Got a phone call from a guy called Leon Booth @ microsoft regional support, and he was FANTASTIC! - Got a direct phone number @ e-mail to use for communicating with him for the length of this problem.
To cut a long story short, 2 days later still no success, so we started monitoring thread creation calls (they send some utilities to do this) - Leon sent this to the guys that wrote the services for mac service, they suggested a registry hack, which actaully fixed the problem.
Our support guy was saying that if it did not fix the problem the MS would send a tech out with a debug box? (a box that sits next to our server and traces every call), and send the results to the US for analysis - all for the $200. Now try and get that service from a guy at the end of IRC!
Anyway, Leon organised a refund of the $200 support charge because it was deamed a 'bug'
Re:You prove the point right there (Score:5, Insightful)
And FYI I couldn't care less about linux becoming mainstream. Yeah you heard me. Fuck mainstream linux, it blows. I've been a user since the days when all you had were a boot and a root floppy, and everything else was do it yerself. I like it like that. When you have mainstream you cater to the intelligence of the average person. That leads to things like microsoft's glorious products. And all this "it's the desktop os of choice...for the masses!" bullshit has been creeping into linux distros too. Have you seen the stuff they have on new "mainstream" linux distros? Yeah they work out of the box with a cutesy x installers and all this other cruft, but god damn if it isn't more trouble in the long run than burning a minimal copy of debian and building the software you need, as you need it.
Not surprised (Score:3, Insightful)
For the most part, we wouldn't hire them to work at the on-campus computer labs. They could never debug problems unless they had the manuals open, and even then... fat chance.
These are the future ineffectual middle-managers, the guys who got into computers because 4 years ago, they were told dot.com was the way to go... oops, sorry kids, no jobs for you! (*)
(*) unless your frat buddies get them for you, but we'll know that's how you got in, and we'll make you pay for it
A bit pessimistic? (Score:4, Flamebait)
Do you even realize what you just wrote? You completely discounted about about 7 years worth of students (assuming "late 90s" includes 1995 forward). Well guess what? I graduated in the "late 90s" and I was in love with UNIX. And it was taught to me by others who would also graduate in the "late 90s". They taught me about all kinds of flavors (FreeBSD, Solaris, Irix, HP-UX, and Ultrix to name a few). And yes, even Linux (I popped my cherry on Slackware).
I think we can all agree, each class has those who exceed, those who do just enough to pass, and those who suck. Those who suck are probably too lazy to learn Visual Basic, so screw them. Those who do just enough to pass might not be "Uber-Geeks", but they'll get jobs doing the easier work, and get paid handsomely for it. Good for them. They probably don't want to work in your on-campus lab anyway, since you sound about as friendly and willing to teach as the BOFH.
As for those who exceed... let's just hope they can work their magic without being as jaded and biased as you seem to be.
-FF
Re:Not surprised (Score:5, Insightful)
You are right and wrong on one account though: I couldn't program my way out of a paper bag because I WAS learning how to solve real problems. Most of the stuff I did was all theory and enough programming to illustrate it. Did I master C? Not really, but enough to solve problems in my OS class. Did I talk about Lisp in my sleep? No, but I knew enough to create a variation on battleship for my AI class. Is ORCA useful for anything nonacademic or does anyone actually use the Amoeba distriubted OS? No, but it taught me to think that way. My Computer Science degree was just that: Computer SCIENCE. I've had enough of a problem solving background to figure out a way to do almost anything I put my mind to, including installing, running and progrmming for Linux. I'd rather hire someone who thinks about a problem first and then applies what they know to it, including where to look if they don't know the answer.
Lastly, it's been my experience that at most computer labs the staff has been the more clueless than those asking the questions.
psxndc
Re:Not surprised (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Not surprised (Score:3, Insightful)
To be honest, I think that anyone doing a CompSci degree who can't get the hang of Linux could be doing the wrong degree, but never mind.
Re:Not surprised (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not surprised (Score:5, Insightful)
Programming, on the other hand, at least as I see it, has a lot to do with technical anecdotes. For example, in C, typedef'ing a struct with the tag underscored, so that you can type just "link" instead of "struct _link" every time you touch a node in a linked list. Or, writing a fuzzy routine that decides whether to inline or outline the clause of an if function in a compiler, or knowing that NVidia cards have funky OpenGL fog processing under certain driver versions, and that under Windows you have to manually notify child windows of font changes. Computer Science is a pure science - Programming is more akin to engineering and applications of pure science in the real world. x86 is an application of a Von Neumann architecture, the Haskell language is an application of higher-order functions.
Good computer scientists can be good programmers, but aren't necessarily. I number many CS degree holders among my colleagues and friends who can't hack their way out of a paper bag. At the same time, I know many who can.
Re:Not surprised (Score:2, Informative)
I don't know about everyone else but when I hear "IT" that says to me: ISM not CS. ISMs do not have to take "OS theory" or "algorithms" in most places - and if they do - and they get a good grade in them, then they are probably not the ones running an MS OS.
Derek
MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:4, Insightful)
Basically, in the past when Ive had a NT/2000 or MSSQL issues I've paid my $200 bucks and got it worked out... everytime. Its not free or fun, but generally MS's paid corporate support is actually quite efficient.
Anytime I've had a Linux issue I have basically been told to RTFM.
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:2, Redundant)
Also, I want to add that I really love MSDN.
SuperID
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:2, Interesting)
Usually if a newbie is told to RTFM, that is because their question is answered there.
What I like to do when asked questions that are already answered in TFM is to add WHICH manual to look in to my RTFM.
Normally newbies interpret RTFM to mean: this guy is a total asshole, and doesn't want to help me. If you tell them which manual in addition, they'll be more likely to understand that you did in fact answer their question. Its not like it takes any more effort to say "RTFM; man foo" or "RTFM; www.google.com"
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:5, Funny)
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:3, Informative)
JOhn
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:3, Informative)
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:5, Insightful)
Redhat trouble - About the same.
Linux technical support is identical to Microsofts. you just have to ask the right people. asking in a IRC channel is NOT product support, you didint go to IRC asking about the MSSQL problems did you? why did you do the same for linux?
It's unfair comparasions like this that support the FUD out there.
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:5, Interesting)
Show me a student with $200 to fork over for support. On the other hand, show me a student who could use learning about databases by setting one up. I have SAP, Sybase, Oracle and MySQL discs lying around that I got for free by writing to the companies. They aren't all licensed for commercial use, but they all have kickass support - and the Open Source one has some of the best, for free, pay by incident and contract.
If you're not talking "support for a student" level stuff, I've had eight Oracle consultants under my department farting away time in the cubicles we provided as they played the blame game with IBM over an Oracle on AIX installation... for nearly three weeks. In retrospect, walking in and wiping all partitions and telling them to rebuild the damn installation would have been quicker and cheaper. When I needed support from TCX, I had bought a year of support, ran into a problem with a persistant connect through a firewall. I gave them an account on my system, went home, came back the next day, and *they* had called the firewall company, gotten support, and had provided precise step by step instructions to fix the problem... on the firewall. They knew it wasn't their problem - but they got it working.
You're the one who brought up Databases, so I figured I'd reply in that vein. As for Linux itself, I've *never* run into a problem that a little Google or mailing list archive searching didn't resolve quickly.
--
Evan
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:3, Funny)
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:3, Interesting)
when Ive had a NT/2000 or MSSQL issues I've paid my $200 bucks and got it worked out... everytime.
If everytime I've had an issue with a Microsoft product, I've paid the $200 to open a trouble ticket with the dialup support, the non-profit organization for which I work would have gone broke. To that end, I haven't tried their phone support.
I have tried other companies phone support (iPlanet, Network Associates, FICS, off the top of my head), and generally found phone support to be a useless waste of time and money. Often I find I know more about the product than the person I'm paying to help me with it. I avoid it whenever I can.
On the other end of tech support, their manuals and documentation, I do have a MSDN Unlimited subscription, which gives me access to a large quantity of their technical documentation both on and offline. I have to say their documentation has some good parts, more than I had expected. I also have to say that the indexing(offline) and searching(online) features of their library are very very poor, and often inaccurate. This makes their documentation much harder to use.
Likewise, I have never tried Linuxcare or any of the other Linux telephone support people. I have found documentation for a typical Free Software package more complete (with a few exceptions) and much better organized (with a few exceptions). Also, with a Free Software package, you have the ultimate canonical documentation, the source code.
Anytime I've had a Linux issue I have basically been told to RTFM.
If you haven't read the manual, you shouldn't be asking on the lists/IRC chanels/newsgroups/whatever, nobody is on the list to read the manual for you. If you are looking for someone to hold your hand so you don't have to read documentation, hire a consultant.
Whenever I've made sure to read the existing documentation first, and made sure to ask a mailing list having something to do with the package I'm having trouble with, I've often gotten higher quality help faster than I've ever gotten with any corporate phone support.
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:2, Flamebait)
It's a commonly known fact that GWB and OBL were drinking buddies in college, and that yer mom really isn't as much a screamer as they say... You can't just throw out complete bullshit and preface it by saying "everybody knows" and not expect to get called on it.
They release products with bugs because they won't trip for most people, can patch them later, and the alternative is shipping the product 10 years late at 10 times the price tag.
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:2)
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:3, Informative)
As a contractor, I was a member of the Kernel, API and Test (KAPT) group on the NT Development Team as a Software Tester, as well as a Software Test Engineer for MSN 1.0, and I *know* from first-hand experience that the above poster has BOVINE FECES for his grey matter!
Software bugs are assigned severity levels, depending on how much of a problem the bug is, whether it causes crashes or fatal errors, or if the bug is just a UI-style bug. The only bugs that software companies are concerned about are "showstoppers" or "Severity-1" level bugs - once those bugs are fixed or handled, they move down the list to the next level, and so on. As soon as the product is "Feature-Set Complete", and there are no "showstopper" bugs, and the bugs down to the "UI-Style" bugs are handled, the software is "Code Complete" and ready to be RTM'ed as "Golden"
There has never been a totally bug-free program ever written in the entire history of Data Processing; however, that depends on what you would call a "bug".
I'll venture to say that the above poster spends way too much time in alt.conspiracy.
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:3, Interesting)
I have. It left a pretty bad taste in my mouth for commercial support offerings.
Re:MS VS. Linux techsupport (Score:3, Insightful)
One example of supporting Linux I had was just recently when I added a new video card and a TV card (BT878). I noticed when installing Mandrake 8.1 it installed the BTTV stuff and xawtv. I fired up xawtv and the scan failed (could not read from
Real Example. (Score:5, Insightful)
Schools are a tough nut to crack for OSS, because students have no moral qualms about piracy and a lot of professors demand closed file formats for assignments to be electronically filed.
--saint
Re:Real Example. (Score:3, Funny)
It's easier to copy an MS Office CD, install it and write the resume than it is to either
a. Download open office, install and use that
b. Use TeX
c. Admit you suck and use an AbiWord rpm/deb
Re:Real Example. (Score:3, Interesting)
I personally use Linux as my main OS (read as 90% of my computing time - the other 10% is Black and White playing). But... My resume is still done in Word2k.
Why? Well, I first did it years ago in Word95. When I opened it in StarOffice 5.2 - it opened just fine (I use a bunch of crazy formatting to make it all fit so I was amazed). So I thought, great! But then I edited it in SO and saved it in Word format and e-mailed it to myself so I could print it out at Kinko's. Lo and behold when I got to kinkos and opened it - almost all of the formatting was lost and I had to redo the whole thing in Word2k. (have recently tried beta6 with same results)
I wouldn't want a potential job to be given to someone else because their formatting stayed, and mine didn't - so I am going to stick with using Word2k for my resume.
My School is great (UMR [umr.edu]) - we even learn assembly on Sparc processors, and we usually don't have to code in any particular language or for any particular OS. But unfortunately most HR departments out there are not so open, and Word is the defacto standard, so that is what I have to use.
BTW - This post stuck out to me because I use a pirated copy of Win2k and Office2k to do my Resume - so you really struck a nerve.
Derek
Re:Real Example. (Score:2)
Words from a CS Undergrad... (Score:5, Informative)
My perception is somewhat similar. But, from what I've seen of the students with these amoral views, trying to look 1337, is that they generally mature, or they crack and become business majors or MCSE's.
Closed file formats are a big problem, and I don't think some profs realize what they are doing. Generally there are way's around this type of crap if you want to put forth the effort: My CS prof asked that all projects be turned in as Window's EXE's. My solution was to install linux mingw32 and setup wine, but I could have just as easily borrowed someone's W2K setup disks, and got a copy VC++. Need a .doc file? Use staroffice. Unsure of the results? Check it in the lab.
Closed file formats are easy to avoid (Score:3, Interesting)
The first step was to specify the assignment in number of words, 200 or 500 words instead of 1/2 page or 1 page. After that, it was sort of a carrot and stick thing.
Carrots:
- My web pages worked in their favorite browsers.
- The web was (still is) trendy.
Sticks:Use the office hours to find a way in which they are willing to try it and be prepared to meet them more than half way. If you make the experience convenient and useful, then they'll also tell they colleagues. But if you don't ask, you don't get.
Have you ever used Microsoft Technical Support? (Score:5, Insightful)
>offered by the Linux community.'
While I can not speak to using the pay-per-use support of the Linux Vendors, if you use Microsoft's Incident based support system, It is really really damn good. I have not contacted any other Vendors where you can call w/ a technical support problem and speak to the developers of the application at 11:00 at night.
Please do not flame... I am not saying that the Linux community provides bad support. In terms of free support services, they kick M$ ass.... I am only speaking to my experience w/ Microsoft's Pay-per-incident support....
Re:Have you ever used Microsoft Technical Support? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Have you ever used Microsoft Technical Support? (Score:2, Flamebait)
Their support is a joke if you're asking a question where something actually went wrong, instead of it being a problem between the keyboard and the chair.
(Just a note, they have always refunded the money a month or two after deducing that they had no fucking clue what was wrong though)
Re:Have you ever used Microsoft Technical Support? (Score:2, Informative)
The tickets don't get closed unless you confirm the problem is resolved
Ever.
So you're either full of it or you gave up.
Re:Have you ever used Microsoft Technical Support? (Score:4, Informative)
On the other hand, I only needed the help I recieved due to technet not having the help I needed (disaster recovery document is missing one vital step). Seems like a setup to force you to call and pay for tech support.
a another anecdote (Score:5, Funny)
Huh. A few years ago I had a problem with Windows NT 4 where it was sometimes having trouble exchanging packets with other machines on the local network. Finally broke down and called the Microsoft pay-per-incident line, and after an hour or so of trying things, the guy had me remove and reinstall the TCP/IP stack, which solved the problem. I asked what he thought might have been the issue, and he said " Oh, it does that sometimes. "
Now, in all fairness, they may have gotten better since then, and I've heard good things technically (leaving aside ethically and morally) about their more modern offerings. But I've always thought "Windows: it does that sometimes" made a pretty good slogan.
Re:a another anecdote (Score:4, Insightful)
he could get in serious trouble for giving away sensitive information about the product
True. In fact a good friend of mine used to work in the Exchange support group, and apparently Microsoft has a private knowledge base, almost as big as the public one, of bugs that are not to be disclosed as bugs under any circumstances. If one of these secret bugs is thought to be the culprit, the tech will just say, "I'm talking out of my ass, but let's try this..." or "maybe something goofy like this will clear it up," or (wait for it...) "it just does that sometimes."
It made me want to puke when he told me that.
Of course, who's to say HP doesn't do the same with HP-UX, or IBM with AIX? At least you can look at the source to Solaris, so they can't truly hide bugs.
Re:Have you ever used Microsoft Technical Support? (Score:3, Insightful)
We do it. Server is trashed.
Well, we kick ourselves because we should have known better than to trust someone else with a really big problem. One of our managers wants a refund, though. And Microsoft tech support says no. Their position is that they did provide support - just not very good support. Specifically, they cannot guarantee results (which is reasonable). Still, the ill will they have instilled in us is substantial. Goes to show the point made in the article: with a lack of real experience, all people will know is what they heard from the marketing guys.
Is this really a myth? (Score:2, Interesting)
Most IT undergrads these days don't know a lot about the Internet (or at least, they don't know a lot about it yet.) These are kids that were born in the mid 1980s, for crying out loud. When the average
The kids these days don't know much beyond Internet Explorer and Visual Basic and all those sorts of things because by and large, they haven't been exposed to the real world yet. Now this doesn't mean they won't be eventually, but at the current time their experience is limited. That aside, I still think we need to consider that the point is valid. Microsoft's tech support is better than anything you'll get with Linux-based solutions
That's okay, it gives us something to work on.
Asking the wrong people? (Score:2, Interesting)
Having just finished my BSc in Computer Science, I've found that those who want real world experience will go out and find it on their own. Formal education is there to assist your learning, not to spoon-feed you.
Alot of the students are at school for the piece of paper, not to learn and enjoy the subject matter. We attempt to filter job applicants based on a "geekiness" scale to help remove those who are not interested in the field.
Beware TPB
Re:Asking the wrong people? (Score:2)
Real world experience: those who draw up the job requirement guidelines and sift through the resumes look for one thing - a BS in CS or Electrical Engineering or some such, irregardless of whether it is even APPLICABLE to the position. If the choice falls between the idiot with a CS degree and 2 years of helpdesk, and the guy with a liberal arts degree but 5 years of HARD experience and increasing levels of responsibility - the pointy haired idjuts who do the resume-sifting will hire the CS moron.
Be glad you have your piece of paper. It will be the difference between a job and the unemployment line.
Derek
Microsoft support (Score:5, Informative)
One of the factors is if you're calling them at random, or you have a support aggrement. You ALWAYS pay for support from microsoft. It doesn't come with any product.
THe last place I worked at, we had a microsoft select agreement. Boy is that a deal. (Hahah). We got 150 incedents for $50,000. Sounds crazy, but, it was worth it... To bad we could never use 150 incedents, even if we tried. (150 people in the company, 5 IT people).
The cool thing about the select agreement, is you get a TAM (Technical account manager) that can esclate your call. Plus, he has like 10 customers, so he pays close attention to every case. Its kinda cool when he checks in to see if you were happy with a case.
With a select agreement, you get access to subscriber downloads, which rocks. You can download anything microsoft ever released (Well almost). Wanted to try BOB? go for it. MSDOS 5 in chinese, its there.
Some of thier best support people are in thier exchange support group. The reason being, exchange is a POS that needs alot of attention, and fixing database curruption is a bitch.
-Tripp
review of MS tech support (Score:5, Funny)
It's an MS world... (Score:2, Insightful)
As somebody that supports a product that runs on both MS and UNIX, I've run into so many techs for whom Microsoft is a religion. They'd rather stretch the limits of running the product on MS, instead of sticking it on a Sun box where it'll crank along, because MS is the only system they know in-house. So the product runs slow... and I look bad. But you can't fault them too much: it's all they know. I blame their CIO for not being more aware of what's going on in the world.
And don't get me started on what a useless certification an MCSE is. It was time wasted for me to get one, and I would maybe pay it passing glance on a candidate's resume if I were hiring someone.
Clanger is right. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is listed by the author as a "clanger", or repeatedly offered mistruth. I wholehartedly agree with him. As an experienced Linux user, I feel that the KDE/GNOME choice does not confuse most newcomers to Linux, it confuses nearly all of them, as well as experienced users. What the students should have said was "the KDE/GNOME choice confuses everybody".
I'm so tired of having to decide which featureset I want to use today. For C++ development I use Kdevelop, because of the nice C++ features like picklists for virtual functions. However I can't stand KDE's tendency to map its' own colors onto my X applications, nor can I take it desktop switching mode, so for casual web browsing I restart in Gnome. This means that I've had to memorize two control panels, two ways of resizing Xterms (I hate both their Xterm replacements), two ways of virtual desktop switching, etc. If there's anything that's important about the desktop metaphor it is that the metaphor must be intuitive. The problem with choice is that it requires you to gain knowledge in order to make an informed decision. To gain knowledge you have to spend time learning. When I pick up a lab instrument I don't want to spend time learning how to use it's desktop; I don't freaking care how it works. I want to use the instrument.
The GNOME/KDE choice is annoying. Honestly I don't care which one goes away, I just wish one of them would.
Re:Clanger is right. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Clanger is right. (Score:2, Insightful)
I mean, they're just X clients, right? And you have all the necessary support libs, right?
So, what's the problem? Just use the desktop environment or window manager of your choice and all your applications of choice.
Re:Clanger is right. (Score:4, Funny)
I like competition that creates better products. I like the fact that we have 2 good desktop environments to choose from. If you don't like having a choice, then just flip a coin to pick one and block the other one out of your mind. Ignore any articles that mention it. If a co-worker speaks the offending name, put your hand up in his face to silence him, then walk away. Before you know it, Linux will seem just like Windows to you. This method will work for most other situations in which you face a choice too.
Re:Clanger is right. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Clanger is right. (Score:5, Insightful)
What does bother them (again, this is in my experience) is a) Linux isn't whatever OS they're used to, b) it doesn't have Office, c) problems with hardware support (although I've had better luck with Linux than with Windows) and d) it doesn't offer a compelling reason to leave the OS they've already paid for and know how to use.
Incidentally, as far as your own situation, I don't understand (not flaming, just suggesting) why you don't either just run KDevelop and your preferred terminal in Gnome or spend five minutes looking through the KDE Control Center and changing the things you're complaining about, all of which are in there.
Re:Clanger is right. (Score:2)
Could I set up my box to do exactly what I want? Of course. But I have other, better ways to spend my time, and I don't want to. So I use my Linux boxes for the things that I like doing in Linux, and my Win98 box for things I find convenient to do in Windows. Anyone who wants to say that I am not a "real geek" because of that is welcome to; I would simply encourage them to think about that very hard the next time he or she laments the difficulty Linux has in making real inroads onto the desktop.
The resources of the OSS community are limited, and too few to waste. Gnome and KDE would set a terrific example if they would get together, rationally and unemotionally select the most desirable features from each, and include them in the one frontrunning Linux desktop. It should be aimed squarely at Windows and at demonstrating that Linux is in fact ready for the desktop.
Anyone who doesn't like Linux emulating Windows, well, the beauty of OSS is, I suppose, that he can go make his own.
-db
Re:Clanger is right. (Score:3, Insightful)
There is nothing that says you can't run kdevelop in GNOME if you so desired. The desktops are there for choice, not to obligate you to use them.
As a developer, you probably would want to have the flexibility to see what your program looked like in each environment as much as a web page designer would like to say what his/her page looks like in different browsers.
Am I really THAT different from the rest of you? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:wrong headed. (Score:3, Insightful)
Support issues? Not if ... (Score:4, Interesting)
A few weeks ago the Exchange 2000 server decided it was going to roll over and die and to corrupt the mailbox stores with it. We tried restoring (which took 30 minutes to pull off of tape) but it was a no go. When the system state backups didn't fly, we realized we might need to rebuild the server from scratch...
Instead of wasting 2 hours pulling off a stock Win2K Server image and reconfiguring everything, MS support actually referenced a few obscure cases and we had it resolved in about 25 minutes.
A few months before a power surge sporked out a rackmount running Samba on Linux 2.4.x. Fsck laughed at us and we had a LOT of data to pull off too. It was going to take about 3 hours to restore the data from tapes. So we gave IBM a call while we were restoring. Only took about 20 or so minutes to get an answer and back up and running.
Verdict? I don't see any problem with Linux support as long as you have a contract of sorts. I wouldn't dare leave big messes or small disasters to usenet or forums -- for ANY OS. That's fine for configuration quirks, or trying something new on a test server, but when something needs to be fixed and you've tried everything in the run book, you need someone you can rely on.
And for the record, with the exception of a burp each, both the Linux and Windows 2000 servers are humming along without a problem. I have no real preference -- they each do their job and do it well.
Emacs (Score:2)
I agree. At my old school (mid-sized public school) senior classmates couldn't use the console version of emacs (no mouse manipulatable menu). I have to admit, I'm not a superior emacs user, but I am quite familiar with my editor of choice (vi, well make that vim)
Dead On (Score:4, Insightful)
1) Whenever I have a SERIOUS problem with the guts of something run by microsoft. I have actually had them custom write a fix for me for the OS.
2) At the end of the day, I need someone to strangle. Am I going to go tell the CIO of a Fortune 500 company that some hack coder added something to the kernel that screwed us?
3) I know EXACTLY who to call. Who do I call for a Linux issue? Redhat? IBM? Who did I buy it from? Who is supporting it?
Redhat has done wonders for the industry. But I need ONE vendor to contact for ALL my issues who has deep expertise in all aspects of the software. I can't go to Linuxcare or any third party. I want to be on Linux...but I am running these systems on Sun and M$ for just this reason
Re:Dead On (Score:3, Interesting)
However RedHat will support anything on their distribution CDs and I know where I can find BSD support for damn near anything (most of the core team is available for around $350 US an hour for phone support, Jordan used to do onsite support for a little more plus airfare -- and they'll support 75% of the ports tree (6000+ programs)).
MS supports what they ship, just like Oracle, Redhat, PGSQL Inc, and various other companies support their own products.
It's seldom that you can call a single vendor unless it's Dell or Gateway as you've had custom configured boxes sent your way -- in which case they support exactly what they ship too!
Heh, yeah right :o) (Score:2)
Microsoft is increasing prices, the IT sector is having a hard time, but coding and improving opensource software hasn't stopped (Gnome 2.0, KDE 3, Open Office, all major distributions have released or are planning to release new distro's, Mozilla becoming better than sex(r), Evolution 1.0, PostgreSQL (and Mysql, kinda) being a condender to all major databases, and not to forget 2.4.* becoming more stable everyday (okay, it doesn't go okay EVERYday...), and the list goes on and on )
And, besides all these really nice goodies, more and more people are trying out Linux and opensource software. It's becoming more and more mainstream everyday. A whole army of teenagers are experimenting with Linux on a day to day basis. Don't worry about the next generation(r), just wait and see. By the time all you 1-st generation hackers are retiered, Open Source software will be used and known by everyone one on a day to day basis. Server, workstation, embedded, mobile or wearable. ;)
Have a bit of faith
greets, :)
the next generation
Sandlot vs. Pro Baseball (Score:5, Insightful)
Wait, wait, for my next trick, I think I'll compare the support you can get from your 20-year-old son for Windows to a Red Hat corporate support plan.
It would be wiser to compare the support from an actual Linux company, such as Red Hat or IBM, to that of Microsoft.
That's Because... (Score:3, Informative)
Of 150 freshmen I had regular contact with in college, there were 3 (including myself) who were really interested in computers. I bet a similar ratio groks Linux (Maybe it'll say in the story once their poor server recovers from its harsh slashdotting.)
The best in the industry... (Score:2)
Now, many people will tell you that the reason support sucks is because of the profit "thing". The idea of "1 phone call in and there goes the profit for the shrinkwrap version" is ridiculous given the price of software, but still bandied about by everyone, including Microsoft. The hardware guys of course *can* make this argument since a few calls from granny and her brand new Gateway seriously cuts into the company's already strenuously thin margin.
Having said that, I can't agree with the assertions made by the distinguished submitter of this article (never mind that I don't really care what IT undergrads think). Microsoft's tech support, at the consumer level, sucks. But then so does IBM's and Oracle's and, for that matter, RedHat.
At the more advanced (and expensive) level, Microsoft support changes dramatically and becomes actually very good. Surprisingly good, even. My experience with 2nd and 3rd tier Oracle and IBM (software) support also confirms this. I only have consumer-level experience with RedHat (the first and last box I ever bought from them before I started downloading ISOs myself), and it sucked. Can anybody comment on the quality of high-level support from them or some other "we don't sell but we service" Linux/OSS companies?
I'm sure there are as many "he told me to RTFM" stories from users in both sides of the fence.
Not my experience (Score:2)
That's when I really started to dislike billg.
my $.02
We don't need no stinkin' tech support! (Score:2)
I don't understand, Linux support is great (Score:3, Redundant)
I like it when I ask a question (almost any question), and I get "RTFM" in response (sometimes with "luser" appended).
Yeah, at what Universities? (Score:4, Interesting)
Here at Iowa State University, linux is perceived as the god of all operating systems. More students are fed up with Microsoft and their holes, and even more faculty and staff, as well as departments, are following right along. Unfortunately, ISU signed off on a Microsoft campus agreement making linux on the average desktop a no-go, but most students who work in IT-related fields are installing linux. The Ames Area Free Unix Group for Information Technology (AAFUGIT [aafugit.org]) is rapidly growing and there is an increase in newby questions.
I think the sample for this census should've been expanded to more Universities/colleges. Perhaps the places where this is really a problem is places like Vatterott and DeVry and what not, where people are trained to do a particular thing and not the science behind it. Anyway with a decent background in computer hardware and software can't deny the power of linux. As I've told many people I've converted, "if you really want to learn networking and what-not, you can't learn by clicking a few buttons (like in Windows) - you have to go to the source...in a matter of speaking."
Exactly (Score:4, Insightful)
These are not the system administrators or NASA programmers of tomorrow. They're getting a 2-year tech degree and then they'll be on the news bitching about how there are no good jobs in IT.
Unsurprising. (Score:3, Insightful)
Does it mean 'fix it for meeeeee! wah!'? If so, Microsoft stomps the hell out of Linux. Their whole _concept_, including for developers (see Visual Basic), is for there to be inner circles and outer circles, in a centralised authority structure. You can have teams of Microsoft insiders working themselves into ulcers for you if you need it- you do NOT get control, ownership of the product, or the final say. Guys like Ballmer expend HUGE effort into making sure the MS insiders ARE still willing to sweat blood to assist J. Random Developer (i.e. hold their hand, wipe their nose, fix their problem). If not for this huge effort ('developers developers developers developers!'), you would be unimaginably screwed dealing with them. The dependency relationship is based on an immense effort on Microsoft's behalf to be the caretaker.
They could stop at any time (Ballmer dies, new CEO is bean counter or something) and it's worth considering just HOW hard Ballmer tries to keep the monolith centered on the needs of certain customers. HE knows that the natural reaction is to screw the customer, get lazy and stop providing good service since you've got them locked down anyhow.
By comparison, if 'technical support' means 'give me the power to do it myself', it's tough to beat Linux, simply because you can get ownership of so much (for all practical coding purposes). For many projects it's easy to get full disclosure of source code. You get to fork off versions if you have a need- you get to incorporate other people's stuff into yours if you follow the licensing rules- there's no 'inner circle' to it at all, and so people get snippy if asked to behave like they are an inner circle. It's 'RTFM' because they know you have just as much capacity to fully acquaint yourself with the situation as they have- and they are not hired to help you, they produce things and you can TAKE them and HAVE them to do with as you will, again with full disclosure. The idea is to take advantage of that.
The interesting comparison here is that this time, if anything drastic happens to Linux, your ownership of your parts of it, and your access to information and your effectiveness, are quite unchanged. It's not a dependency relationship, more like a forced self-sufficiency relationship. You get no support in dependency, but you get resources for self-sufficiency (including legal ones- the licensing) that you flat cannot get from Microsoft.
The question becomes, what sorts of programmers are more relevant and useful to the world? Ones that seek dependency relationships, or ones that seek self-sufficiency relationships? I think there's something to be said for each, but you're a hell of a lot more likely to find cutting edge stuff in the latter camp- which will be pretty unpolished, but that's normal for innovation.
You'll find less innovative software coming out of the dependency camp.
If it's MS, it must be good (Score:5, Insightful)
There are quite a few people who push Linux as the best and only solution. These people are dorks. However, most of us react more strongly to MS products being pushed as the best and only solutions because:
- MS software pricing is an obscenity.
- Linux companies haven't used illegal coercion to make their products the market leaders.
- Until recently, people did not choose Linux-based solutions simply because they had the word "Linux" in them.
- the possibility of single-vendor lock-in is virtually nonexistent for Linux.
I work part-time in tech support here, and I cannot tell you how annoying it is to have to deal with all the Microsoft fanboys who think Windows is the final point in computing evolution. These are techincally astute students, among the brightest in the world, and incapable of dealing with anything that doesn't have the Start menu and Explorer. For my part, I'm glad I'm studying computational biology, where MS products are by and large recognized as utter garbage. If Windows ever becomes the platform of choice for serious scientific computing, I'm going to law school instead.
Fighting FUD with FUD... (Score:3, Insightful)
But no, he lists the (common, cliched) reasons that Linux isn't fit for the desktop, and then goes on to deny them, point by point. He then throws in a little Microsoft-bashing, which makes the article seem less like a helpful "Where do we go from here?" and more like a "Linux rocks; I don't understand why everyone isn't using it" rant.
Case in point: He cites the "infamous reliability" of Windows, then says: "it has become okay for a PC (running Windows) to crash once a day (or more often)." Since when? And since when does a non-9x OS from Microsoft crash more than once a day? I run Windows 2000, and it doesn't crash. If it crashes, it's a hardware problem. Applications crash, sure. But no one has yet solved the application crash problem. Windows NT and XP have about the same reliability. Uptimes of 5-100 days (which I have seen with Windows 2000) are perfectly fine for workstations, most of which get turned off at the end of the day, regardless. As much as I hate some of the features in Windows XP, I am still encouraging people to upgrade to it if they use a 9x-based OS. Folks, no computer should crash more than once a week, and you don't have to run around saying "Use Linux" if you want that type of reliability.
The author then goes on to quote students who say "Linux is seen as a geek's OS. Programmers love it and that puts everyone else off." But instead of explaining how Linux can be more friendly to non-technical users, he cites the "anti-Linux FUD campaign coming out of Redmond". Microsoft or no Microsoft, Linux vendors and programmers are just now realizing that ease-of-use matters, even to technical professionals. Instead of addressing this need in his article, he points fingers at Microsoft, which isn't productive.
One final comment which really irked me was his response to the following complaint: "The Linux command line is hard to learn and use." He responds with "No, it simply is not." How does this comment address the real issue? If your students feel that the command line is hard to use, give them a training manual. Better yet, sit down with them and explain that the command line may have a steeper learning curve, but show them how much more powerful it is!
Let's be honest: there is a lot of FUD in the computer world, made worse by those who think they know what they are talking about. "Windoze crashes constantly. Linux is too hard to use." Instead of regurgitating the same old excuses, let's figure out how to work with these problems. Fight FUD with education, not with more mindless flaming of the supposed "enemy". If your friend says that the command line is too hard to use, don't blow him or her off and say "No it isn't! See, all you have to do is pipe it to wc -g." Instead, sit down, start from the beginning, and explain the benefits of your method of working!
That is what the author should have done with his students.
Problem lies in environment, not with students (Score:5, Insightful)
When I first came to MIT, I knew about Windows and MS Office. That was it. Was I criticized for running Windows? Was I sneered at by zekr1t n1Nj@ Haxxor dudez who were running Linux or NetBSD? No. Instead, someone suggested (nicely; not by saying "Try running a _real_ OS") that I give Linux a try - If I didn't like it, I didn't have to boot into it, and I would only have lost 300MB of hard drive space (those were the days). I was given a RedHat 4.0 network boot disk and the IP address of an NFS server, and I installed Linux. My friends were willing to help me learn things, and give me pointers. There is a community mailing list that people who use Linux can subscribe to and get their questions answered by other members of the community who've been using Linux for much longer. The people on this list didn't get annoyed or flame if you asked dumb questions, nor did they gve you snide "MS sux" remarks if you inquired how to mount a Windows partition in Linux. Because of that environment, I am now a competent Linux user, administrator, and halfway decent developer. You can't expect students to rise to that level if you only offer criticism.
And can you blame students for using MS Office formats to exchange files? The media rarely mentions Linux without saying "hackers" and "computer crime" in the same sentence. Ignorant website developers and system adminsitrators think Microsoft Office is the only answer. I've even encountered people here at MIT who refuse to accept PDF documents, saying that they don't want to deal with the extra effort required to open them. (Who hasn't heard of Acrobat Reader?) In order for this bias to change, colleges need to foster an environment in which Microsoft Office is not the only format for exhanging documents. The campus computing environment here runs on a variety of platforms, including Solaris, IRIX, and Linux, so by default all course-related documents have to be in a format accessible from all platforms. This is accepted for the most part, and materials appear in HTML, PDF, and PostScript (though StarOffice has given some people an excuse to distribute
Education is a key point in this topic, and colleges are a good place to start. I would venture to say that the majority of college students who only use Windows do so not because of choice, but because they are unaware of the alternatives, or because the alternatives seem daunting and unnecessary. These perceptions have to change before more college students will start using Linux.
reality (Score:4, Insightful)
1 - Don't have any exposure to non-MS technology
2 - Beleive everything they read in MS PR
3 - Beleive that crashes and unreliability is a fact of life and unavoidable.
4 - Are unaware of goings on in the rest of the computer world.
And these are the people who are supposed to be our future computer experts and are more knowledgable than the common joes. God help us all.
Microsoft Support is mostly outsourced! (Score:4, Informative)
Stream has a VERY bad reputation. Unless the customer demands it, they hire and train just about anyone. They are kept to very strict call times, which insures the customer has to call back if the solution did not work.
Most of the times I have dealt with Microsoft support, the standard "solution" is to reinstall the OS. (So much for all your system settings and preferences! If you use Kai texture explorer, you lose all your saved textures as well.)
I ask anyone who thinks that Microsoft has good support just how many times they had to call them and why.
Linux Support. (Score:4, Insightful)
There is quite a problem with the active linux users thinking that they are almighty and superior. Personally I use both windows and linux and I have no problem answering questions for either OS. Both are a complete pain in the ass to use.
If you have a problem with windows, you can call up your neighborhood 14 year old and get the problem fixed with a pepsi, if you have a problem with linux ... you can _try_ to get a support package or find a local lug to help you out, but that's not as conforting.
The only thing keeping Linux alive right now is LUG's and their support for newbies. I have found that even inside LUG's you will find the egotistical types who want the user to "Learn on their own". My only problem with telling them to learn on their own is the simple fact that if they're question is "I don't have man pages installed what do I do" ... and you answer RTFM ... you just lost another linux user and their influence on other users.
For every one user you convert to linux ... they will convert three more ... it works for drugs and religions ... so be it ... it will work for linux.
Re:Linux Support. (Score:3, Informative)
dpkg-name (1) - rename Debian packages to full package names
mmove (1) - move or rename an MSDOS file or subdirectory TQ
mren (1) - rename an existing MSDOS file TQ
mv (1) - move (rename) files
rename (1) - renames multiple files
rename (2) - change the name or location of a file
XStoreName (3x) - set or read a window's WM_NAME property
XStoreNamedColor (3x) - set colors
"man -k rename" would also have worked.
See, they just don't know how to use the man pages. They should have "man man"ed.
Office on OS X v. X Windows (Score:4, Insightful)
He should add this to his 'clanger' section.
The ease of porting Office to OS X has nothing to do with the ease of porting Office to X Windows. Microsoft has had a version of Office on Mac for years. The OS X environment has two sets of APIs for programmers: Carbon and Cocoa. Cocoa is the native OS X set of APIs. Carbon is a translation layer that maps the APIs from Mac OS 9 and below to the correct function calls on OS X.
The ease of porting Office to OS X is due to the engineers at Apple who created OS X.
Fight FUD with FUD!
J.J.
A real case (Score:5, Funny)
"Hello Microsoft support, what can I help you?"
"I got a problem...."
"We'll charge $179 for each probblem instance, 3 instances minimum."
"So...the minimum charge for raising a support call is....$537 right?..."
"Right you are....what is your second question?"
Sorry I made the last one up, but the rest is real.
I hate to say it, but.... (Score:4, Interesting)
The most interesting thing.. (Score:3, Insightful)
The article itself is mildly interesting, although it basically comes down to sending uninformed students to read all the FUD they can find on both sides and seeing what sticks. And the author doesn't seem to understand what Linux being free really means, and is wrong when he corrects his students about the cost of Windows. (If a PC costs the same with and without Windows, it is effectively free (beer) for you, even if someone ultimately pays for it.)
But I thought the most interesting thing was this bit:
Then the first shock came: someone blurted out, "nearly everyone who used Linux last year went on to fail their project". It came out that a number of individuals were missing from the final year due to failing the project element in year three. When I probed for the root cause of the project-failing problem, I got my second shock: "Linux is too hard to install".
Uh, hello? Anyone see anything ominous about that anecdote? It seems odd to hear that account and decide that the problem is that users need to be convinced that Linux is easy to use.
My (excellent) experience with Linux support (Score:4, Interesting)
A few months ago, I had an issue with sound under the latest 2.4 series kernels. This was with the trident driver and an ALi 1535+ southbridge. I have been using Linux as my sole desktop operating system for a while, and sound is very important for desktop/gaming use. This bug caused an OOPS when the module was loaded, which became a serious problem.
I read Documentation/oops-tracing.txt, and I submitted my report with whatever information I could figure out. What did I get in response? Within four days, 7 people were talking on this thread, including kernel giants Alan Cox and RML. Within four days, I had a patch that made this problem go away. (turned out to be bigger than just my card)
Do you really think that I could have gotten that kind of support from Microsoft? You might say that four days is a lot. But do you think I'd have ever gotten anywhere with MS? Even if I could get the level of debugging as I did from ksymoops, I'd have gotten shoved around. Microsoft would claim that its the manufacturer's responsibility, and the manufacturer would certainly not be receptive to any kind of technical description of a problem from a customer.
We're the guys who call the DSL company and have to say "Your access concentrator is sending a PADT packet to terminate the session," with the only response being "Sir, can you tell me if your modem is on?" I've actually tricked at least 2 of their techies into believing that I'm running Windows.
Verizon: Now open up Network Neighborhood.
Me: Hold on a second. It's still warming up... Oh damn, it hung. Let me reboot.
I didn't pay a cent for support. In exchange for a few minutes of my time learning to use ksymoops, I got replies from some of the top kernel developers, and got the problem fixed. Beat that, Microsoft.
Michael F. Robbins
You have all missed the point! (Score:5, Informative)
This is what you should be looking for in terms of support:
Purchase from a Linux vendor:
Check to see what your purchase entitles you to, for most distro's this is a standard 30-60 day installation support.
If you want more then most of the larger distrobutions will offer professional services as an extra offering, in fact this is common with large software products, check with the distro to see how much it is and what they can offer.
Hardware vendor:
The big one here is IBM. Never purchased from them, but it might be similer to what the distro's offer.
In fact here is what they offer:
Depending on customer need, IBM offers 24-hour a day, 7-days a week Internet and voice support, ranging from answering usage questions to identifying problems. IBM Global Services also provides consulting, planning and implementation services for Linux. IBM consultants can help you evaluate whether Linux is appropriate for your particular environment.
Now, customers can turn to IBM Global Services as a one-stop shop for Linux support. For information on properly configuring and implementing, as well as enhancing, your Linux solutions or additional service and support offerings please call 1-888-426-4343.
IBM operational support services
*
IBM is here to support Linux at every step of the way on its remarkable journey. We've already dedicated $1 billion to Linux development and will invest more than $300 million in Linux services over the next three years.
*
7x24 Enterprise Level remote support for your Linux OS environment.
*
Fast and accurate problem resolution.
*
A way to supplement your internal staff with IBM's skilled services specialists.
*
Defect support for supported distributions of the Linux OS and Linux applications.
*
Electronic support and problem submission that saves you time and allows you to track your open support issues.
IBM's premier remote technical support for Linux
An IBM Business Partner, Worklab develops its solutions with IBM e-business products such as IBM DB2 Universal Database for Linux, Lotus Notes and Lotus Domino.
We help answer your how-to questions, help you define problems and determine their source. Additionally, by leveraging our partnerships with the key distributors of the Linux operating system, IBM is able to provide defect-level support for the Linux OS. Remote assistance is available through toll-free telephone access and electronic access. For all eligible distributions of the Linux operating system, we help you with:
*
IBM is here to support Linux at every step of the way on its remarkable journey. We've already dedicated $1 billion to Linux development and will invest more than $300 million in Linux services over the next three years.
*
usage and installation questions
*
interpretation of product documentation
*
product compatibility and interoperability questions
*
a diagnostic information review to help isolate the cause of a problem
*
configuration samples
*
IBM and multivendor database searches
*
planning information for software fixes
*
defect support
Electronic Support allows you to submit and get answers to your problems electronically.
Not so bad, despite the majority of whining by users who want proffesional support for things that they freely downladed Linuxcare is still going, and yes you have to buy this support. Actually IBM use Linuxcare too.
If you want free support for a free download, go to usenet or use mailing lists.
Matt
CS Student at my school varied (Score:3, Interesting)
We didn't have to deal with UNIX/Linux much outside of a couple classes, though, so it was really easy for students to hate it, and not know how to use it, which was really quite sad.
It IS Funny: Reality = !Hype (Score:3, Insightful)
Microsoft has all the trappings of technical support. Call this 1-800-number. We have operators standing by. We employ more programmers than any other PC software house. We advertise that we have support.
But the reality, when you really have a problem, is a less glitzy than the hype. Wait on hold unless you pay extra, be told to reboot, be told to reinstall the OS and apps in a new magic sequence, that it's a hardware maker that has the bad software driver, that the fix will be in the next Service Pack, etc.
Linux OTOH has very sketchy official sounding support. Sure, 1-800 numbers for some paid-for distros, but if you ask Linux users, the vast majority get help out of the bazaar.
And the surprising reality is just how successful such a support model can be. Someone in Germany with the same video card posted his XFree86 config file to Usenet. Go figure!
It's a strange difference. On one hand, being told that you have a designated and well-described support channel that practically turns out to be unsatisfying in many regards, and on the other hand, being told to stake your critical need for help and assistance on a to-be-determined random unidentified stranger in an amorphous mass of users that practically turns out to be more satisfying than you ever expected.
No wonder many people are confused.
Re:Its sickening! (Score:3, Interesting)
"If anyone had told me back then that getting back to embarrassingly primitive UNIX would be the great hope and investment obsession of the year 2000, merely because it's name was changed to LINUX and its source code was opened up again, I never would have had the stomach or the heart to continue in computer science."
-- Jaron Lanier
Re:Fast way to dispel that myth (Score:2, Insightful)
A better set of problems would be if the windows one was something along the lines of:
The command prompt in NT isn't coming up when someone types Start -> Run -> cmd.exe. Fix it.
Bah! (Score:2)
How about: You have a computer, it didn't do what you want. Possibly there is some problem inside the case. OK, fix it!
Re:Is anyone surprised that "IT" students are idio (Score:2, Troll)
Re:Ask the kids, not the working stiffs (Score:5, Interesting)
I have been teaching classes at a local college for six years and my experience has been completely different. A majority of the students in my evening and weekend classes are "working stiffs," but many of these "working stiffs" are working in CS fields and are more knowledgable than the whiny brats in my daytime classes that are attending school and are funded by the "Bank of Daddy."
Age doesn't necessarily determine whether or not someone understands and uses *nix or the "other operating systems." The "working stiffs" in my evening and weekend classes tended to have more practical experience in computer science, including more exposure to a wider variety of operating systems, than their daytime counterparts.
When I teach evening classes, I am used to people being able to follow along when I use Vim and Cygwin so that I can feel at home and productive in the school-mandated MS OS. My first daytime class was an eye opener! I spent WAY too much time explaining that ls is the same as dir (except better), that less is type (but with functionality), etc. At first, the blank stare "deer-in-the-headlights" looks that I got when I didn't explain such things surprised me. Then I realized that a majority of my day students seemed to care more about their grade than about the quality of the education they were receiving.
Yes, there are generalizations in what I have typed, but after my second daytime class, I vowed never to teach another class between 8am and 5pm.
Re:Ask the kids, not the working stiffs (Score:2, Interesting)
OK, make it an assignment:
Write a paper documenting the differences between Windows 2000 commands and UNIX commands: ls/dir, cd, etc.
Install an alternative UNIX: FreeBSD or Linux . Write an essay on the differences between installing i386 UNIX and Windows.
Then give them CDs. Make it 25% of the quarter grade, and give 'em a week.
Re:Ask the kids, not the working stiffs (Score:3, Funny)
Install an alternative UNIX: FreeBSD or Linux . Write an essay on the differences between installing i386 UNIX and Windows.
My UNIX Install experience.
For my project I decided to install a Linux. First of all,I missed class so I didn't get the CD. So I went to a bunch of warez sites to look for it to download, but I couldn't find it. My friend says you can get it for free, but who knows what he's been smoking. I mean you don't just GIVE an operating system away for free you know? Eventually I got a couple CD's from a friend of a friend. It then asks a bunch of complicated questions about "partitions" and stuff, so I just hit enter or okay for everything. I didn't see any C: drive mentioned, so I don't even know if it installed on the computer (but I think it did because it started). So anyway, I got it to start, but in order to see my desktop, I have to configure some file because the resolution is all messed up or something and Xwindows won't start. A friend of a friend told me where the file was to configure it, but I guess I have to use this program called V.I. to edit it. Well the program must have been broken or something because it wouldn't let me enter anything. I mean you press some keys and the cursor jumps around, and sometimes it deletes stuff. Since I couldn't get it to work I shut off the computer. I can't find my Windows 98SE CD, so I think my computer is broken....
and Yes, this is flaimbait
Re:Ask the kids, not the working stiffs (Score:2, Insightful)
Don't Bash AOL! (Score:2)
Hey, don't bash AOL! After all, "AOL *IS* the Internet!" They said it on their commercials, so it *must* be true!
Been in IT for 15 years....slightly different view (Score:2)
I agree (Score:3, Insightful)
Besides, no matter their proficiency at a certain skill set, the employees still have to learn how to be good employees, something they're going to get a better chance at working those low level university IT jobs then they will slaving away over a Cert. And 2 years later, they'll be doing it again, at the employer's cost. On the other hand, a well-rounded employee is going to be constantly advancing his skill set.
It used to be that a cert was an easy road into a job. But lately in the market it seems that certifications can be more of a dead weight if they don't have any practical experience behind them.