

ESR responds to Ed Muth 65
Hygelac writes "ESR has written an article for Linux World dubbed "Halloween V". It's basically a reaction to Ed "The Sheriff of Nottingham" Muth's statements in a PCWeek article. Nothing earth shattering, but somebody had to do it, right? "
Apologies for Linux help MS (Score:1)
Responding to Muth's allegations just lends them credibility. Not responding helps everyone forget about Ed Muth and eventually about MS.
The point is not whether or not this helps or hurts the case MS is trying to build up that Linux is competition. Linux *is* competition, serious competition, on several fronts. Trying to play a game of how this may be used in the trial is futile - the important thing is to use Linux and be proud of it, but not to apoligize for Linux in any way by responding point by point to such charges. Ed Muth can troll too - and that's exactly what he does for a living, with the help of MS "focus" groups to help him put out the best possible bait for suckers like ERS.
Slightly off topic, but ERS's association with Apple doesn't help his image in the free software community. Apple is one of the worst offenders in abusing the legal system with bogus claims to software patents and intellectual property rights. Remember, these are the people who tried to claim an exclusive right to the concept of a graphical user interface, and who were themselves sued by Apple Records (Beatles) for using the Apple name without permission.
The incessant focus on a few well-known personalities and on corporate involvement by the mainstream press is not what Linux is all about to me, and most current users. For us, Linux is a system we use at home and possibly at work as well. The press is caught up in the numbers game and seems to give Linux credibility only when it is endorsed by Fortune 500 companies - despite the fact that home users and small businesses have been using Linux for years in far greater numbers than these faceless corporations have.
The corporate involvement is ok, but Linux is a system designed by a home user for home users. The fact that corporations have found Linux useful in their strategies is not central either to the ongoing success of Linux or our ability to use and enjoy it, but it can be a hazard.
Only if fools like ERS allow us to lose sight of what is of most value and prosititue ourselves by adopting the standards of corporate America will Linux not succeed. Linux is right now on the verge of becoming a viable option for people who are not technical gurus and don't have corporate IT staffs to administer it for them - non-technical home users and small businesses. Not to mention schools and governments outside the USA that do have large pools of educated but underemployed professionals who can administer LInux. Corporate America's involvement is only a part of the picture, unless we make it so by prostituting ourselves to the almighty dollar.
Who! Check that pic!!! (Score:1)
Skip
--------------------
Rebutting Ed Muth (Score:1)
Yes but: (Score:1)
Well, at the company I work at this is definitely not true. I am not a member of the IT department, but there are basically 2 people who take care of all the Unix boxes, which out number NT boxes. There are at least 4 people that I know of that take care of the NT machines, and probably a couple more that I don't know. So, given this I would say the Unix boxes offer a better long term value than the NT boxes.
It's the same where I work, except that instead of using NT and Unix, we use NT and VMS. We have one and a half VMS sysadmins (one fulltime guy and one guy that does a lot of other stuff as well as VMS) looking after our main production servers, and five people either looking after or learning to look after the NT servers - which are an armada of file and print servers, nothing mission critical, and thank god for that because they die all the time.
And NT admins aren't cheap here in Australia, further weaking NT's claim to be cheap.
Nothing earth shattering, but somebody had to do i (Score:1)
ESR ought to consider the negative impact of antics like these, rather than shooting from the hip. I still can't get over "Maid Tove" et al.
Even the usual marketing suspects rarely sink so low. Maybe Eric could go to work for Apple.
"Mac OS X -- runs way faster than those Bazaar operating systems, and comes in a spiffy case!"
Feh.
RMS and his writing style. (Score:1)
Good rebuttle RMS.
Opps. RMS should be ESR (Score:1)
I liked ESR's response, but there was a better one (Score:1)
--Phil (I quite enjoyed the comment, "This is the quote that wins the Ken Olsen Award.")
Public Relations (Score:1)
Enough with "Halloween"... (Score:1)
-----
LOSE not LOOSE (Score:1)
This gets on my wick too, and it's all too frequent.
I guess it could mean "Loosen the ties on x so that it may run away", but it's far more likely that people just can't spell.
somebody didn't have to do anything (Score:1)
I second what jabbo said.
It's hard enough to be taken seriously without regular injections of this sort of cornball D&D fantasy.
thanks anyway
Lack of Professionalism? (Score:1)
That's about all there is to say.
Yes but: (Score:1)
You can hire an MCSE (Must Consult Someone Experienced) for about $10K-$20K less a year, and gamble that he may not have to pay for support from MS.
This may be true.. But you'll need quite a few MCSEs to run around rebooting all the NT machines, while the Linux sysadmin can do just about anything while sitting at his desk.
Publish or perish (Score:1)
--
As long as each individual is facing the TV tube alone, formal freedom poses no threat to privilege.
Yes but: (Score:1)
You can hire an MCSE (Must Consult Someone Experienced) for about $10K-$20K less a year, and gamble that he may not have to pay for support from MS.
Or hell, just get some 16-year-old from Tek Systems.
:-)
'You know how to double-click, right son?'
--
As long as each individual is facing the TV tube alone, formal freedom poses no threat to privilege.
The critics are raving! (Score:1)
-----
NT costs *MUCH* more to administer (Score:1)
It takes alot more work to admin NT, both from an educational standpoint and a time standpoint. It is not just "point, click, and reboot".
To properly admin NT, you need to understand the way Microsoft does things. You have to have the secret and arcane knowledge of registry hacks, incompatibilities, unfixed bugs, and the like. You have to be able to config and fix these things via the GUI interface in most cases or not at all.
You also get to deal with "Master Browsers" (Which are assigned the same way the Medaeval Italians elected Popes), PDCs and BDCs and a whole host of weird concepts invented by Microsoft to fill MSCE classes.
And it just gets worse with the Terminal Server version. There you get to deal with roaming profiles, apps that were never designed to be used multiuser, and a whole host of bugs.
The idea that NT is easier to admin is just another lie. If you don't believe me, ask an NT admin.
Yes but: (Score:1)
Well, at the company I work at this is definitely not true. I am not a member of the IT department, but there are basically 2 people who take care of all the Unix boxes, which out number NT boxes. There are at least 4 people that I know of that take care of the NT machines, and probably a couple more that I don't know. So, given this I would say the Unix boxes offer a better long term value than the NT boxes.
Apologies for Linux help MS (Score:1)
I guess you could say that given that is how Linus started the whole thing, but I think it moved away from being designed for and by home users a couple years ago. I think a more accurate description is that from the Robinson essay referenced in the first post. Linux, GNU, XFree, and Open Source Projects in general are designed for users by users whether that user is a business or a home user. There are two things that happen first users have a need and write the code to fulfill that need by thenselves. The other way is where the user has the need but lacks the expertise to fulfill that need alone. The user then voices the need and often has it fulfilled by some one, especially if it is something that a lot of users might want. This is where the user is the designer, but some one else is the developer.
Lack of Professionalism? (Score:1)
After months of silence out of Redmond, the themes of Microsoft's coming FUD campaign against Linux are beginning to emerge like a zombie army from the fetid mists of Redmond. And who should that black-armored, axe-wielding figure riding point be but our old friend Ed "Sheriff of Nottingham" Muth, apparently recovered from leading with his chin last time around and ready for another go at Linus and his Merry Men of Sherwood.
Does he realize how ridiculous this sounds to anyone in the real world? Heck, even Wired authors aren't this strange.
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
I liked ESR's response, but there was a better one (Score:1)
This one is a bit more thorough..
Ben
Agreed. (was: Lack of Professionalism) (Score:1)
Excellent response to Ed Muth (Score:1)
Again, that web page is http://www.netrinsics.com/Famous.html [netrinsics.com].
Someone had to do it right? Wrong. (Score:1)
I hear people on
But this isn't the code speaking for itself it's self-proclaimed Linux evangelists in a slanging match with Microsoft. This is just playing MS at their own game.
To some extent Linux and OSS movement are based on personality cults so Linux needs personalities to rally around but does it really need zealots and self-proclaimed evangelists? No, only religions need those.
Loose the 'Haloween' name already. Yeesh. (Score:1)
Eloquence? (Score:1)
If I recall correctly, Ed Muth merely stated the standard MS rhetoric about the shortcomings of Linux. ESR replies by immediately resorting to insults and name calling. While I thought ESR's response to the Halloween document were insightful, lately his writting has really degenerated into the infantile. He has, apparently, shed his eloquence and any respect for the guise of infamy. Hardly the spokesperson that the Linux community requires.
Shill for hire? (Score:1)
Apple has built quite a reputation for stringing developers along with promises of nifty hardware and superior operating systems, only to pull the rug out from under their users/developers at the last moment. I'm excited to see that they've joined the Open Software movement (at least in words, we'll see about deeds soon enough..). I'll be interested to watch what happens when people really start making changes to the Darwin code. Steve Jobs is a control freak of the highest order, and it makes me wonder how enthusiastic he really is about turning his baby over to the hordes.
For ESR to associate himself with Jobs could work out badly in the long run when Jobs pulls one of his standard about-face maneuvers. OSSers will become disenfranchised not only with Apple but ESR because he lent his name to their cause.
Who cares? (Score:1)
By the way, I think it's funny that a guy called burger would own a fast food chain
NT costs *MUCH* more to administer (Score:1)
Public Relations (Score:1)
Loose the 'Haloween' name already. Yeesh. (Score:1)
Sorry. Innocent mistake. Can you forgive me? (Score:1)
Yes but: (Score:1)
You can hire an MCSE (Must Consult Someone Experienced) for about $10K-$20K less a year, and gamble that he may not have to pay for support from MS.
Or hell, just get some 16-year-old from Tek Systems.
'You know how to double-click, right son?'
One of the big NT myths (or perhaps marketing lies) is that NT is cheaper to administer than UNIX. One of the reasons often stated for that is that NT admins are significantly cheaper and easier to find than UNIX admins. From what I've seen, it doesn't seem to be true, in general, NT admin salaries are only slightly below what UNIX admin salaries are. Secondly as others have pointed out, you need more administers for large NT installations than large UNIX installations for two reasons, first that UNIX is more reliable so it needs less administration, secondly because it generally takes 3 to 5 times the number of NT servers to replace UNIX servers, thirdly because NT's administration tools make remote administration and automating administration tasks with scripting more difficult than UNIX.
I've also noticed that people who try to scrimp my hiring less qualified administrators pay more in the long run due to significantly higher vendor support bills. Microsoft also charges significant sums for access to technical information such as MSDN and TechNet, the analogs for UNIX of which are generally lower cost, if not outright free.
Yes but: (Score:1)
I am a member of the IT department where I work. We have at least double the number of people maintaining NT servers as UNIX servers, despite the fact that all of our most important production systems are on UNIX and UNIX servers greatly outnumber NT servers at this point in the company (probably by hundreds). The same thing is true of Netware and OS/2 within the company, we have fewer people who maintain them than NT, and more boxes of each than NT. Of any server operating system we use, I'd have to say that NT offers the worst value, especially since it is the least reliable.
Microsoft uses open source tools (Score:1)
It's the hypocrisy that's funny - in a sick kind of way...
Having your cake and eating it too (Score:1)
I have two reactions to this:
1) That code which I have written and released as open source WAS written for my employer while on the company clock.
Why was my company willing to let me GPL code they paid me to write?
Obvious!
- We find Linux of value and the best way to ensure that it *remains* valuable is to pitch in and contribute to the effort.
-The most effective way to debug *MY* code is to let as many hackers as possible beat it up to find the bugs and weaknesses (and send me fixes)! How can you beat that!
2) What Ed Muth doesn't understand is that it's not 5 or 6 super-duper brilliant genius programmers giving away their work for free (although some of the worlds most brilliant programmers *are* involved in writing open source software). What it is is tens of thousands of reasonably competent programmers (with a few brilliant ones thrown into the mix) colaberating, finding each others bugs and working together to improve and expand the code.
Microsoft remains blind to this in spite of how many times it has been publically explained in forums like this, and by organisations like opensource.org.
This myopia on their part will be MS's ultimate undoing.
You forgot something: (Score:1)
Michael Robinson kicks Eric Stallman Raymond's ass (Score:1)
Bob