Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Linux Software

Is Media Attention Bad for Linux? 90

Ender_Stonebender writes "Yahoo's Internet Report news page has an interesting article on why why media attention could be bad for Linux development. They have a byline saying it's from salon.com, but I can't find it there. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Is Media Attention Bad for Linux?

Comments Filter:
  • What a classic display of stupid media. Ok, i'm a linux newbie, but i've been using the internet for ~5 years (this xmas) and i knew that story even before i read it. of course it's going to get skewed. what about the time 'man of the year' with 'mankind' from wwf? retardedly obvious. shoulda left that one out /. it WAS what it was talking about. obviously run/done for the sake of running/doing, not for the sake of informing/advancing. just stupid crap. i can say that here right? (crap) heheh.
  • by Drakino ( 10965 ) on Saturday October 23, 1999 @11:36AM (#1592760) Journal
    The Windows refund day proves that media attention can be bad. I recently rewatched my MPEG copies of the news stories on that, and realised that the person dressed up as someone from Star Wars just completly took any seriousness that the protest had. If Linux people want good media attention, they need to start acting like professionals and not people at Star Trek conventions.

    -----
  • So, in order to not piss anyone off, who should I approach with my linux questions? I would assume the developers would know the most, but I shouldn't waste their time, right?

    Where should I go with all my linux questions? (i.e. Websites, IRC channels...)

  • Wasn't this posted as "Turning an academic eye on Linux" or something when it was on Salon a few days ago?
  • "One hopes, however, that the survey's designers have built in some safeguards to prevent tampering. Open-source hackers, organizing at hubs like Slashdot, are notorious for rushing en masse at new Web surveys and submitting their answers multiple times in brazen attempts to skew the data one way or another."

    Right boys go get 'em!
  • As far as all the attention taking time away from the programmers, thats something that needs to be delt with by the programmers. If they feel it inteferrs with their work, then they can refuse the interviews. If they want to get things done well, they need to manage their time well.

    With support e-mails bogging programmers down, they need to organize things like listserv help or newsgroup help. I recently subscribed to a listserv for the 3Com network driver to try to figure out a problem with the driver and a newer card that 3Com released. I chose this over going to the programmer first.

    -----
  • That's the situation. It's typical stereotyping. You can have a large group of people (just like the Linux community) and if only a handful of them make jackasses of themselves, then the whole group will be seen in that light. It's too bad, but it's certainly not specific to Linux. So, this isn't really news, is it?

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • well come on now, i think that's obvious isn't it? they just wanted to use the word slashdot to get some /. sized pageviews. but careful everyone, don't click on ANY banners. hehehe.
  • The media hardly has the attention span of a mosquito hopped up on caffeine. While we may patiently and diligently await the day when computers are easy, fast, reliable, secure, etc., we are just a flash in the temporary attention span of the media world brought to light by the recent M-soft trials and self-reflection of pop-hackerdom as a flavor.

    a millenialist sort of approach to tech: teams, like some more familiar sport, and playoffs, with winners and losers. Let's face it: computer operating systems are not primetime material. When you get past the idea that 'there can be only one', a lot of the sexy image dissapates and leaves us plain old folk, working as before.

    Reminds me of some of the script-kiddie comments in the cDc interview. They come, they go, some small percentage stay behind. A natural life-cycle...

  • by ajs ( 35943 ) <{moc.sja} {ta} {sja}> on Saturday October 23, 1999 @11:59AM (#1592769) Homepage Journal
    Open-source hackers are accustomed to hearing the likes of evangelist Eric Raymond declaiming authoritatively upon the whys and wherefores of open source, but there's a paucity of hard data to work from.

    While, I think the idea of a survey of Open Source data-points (e.g. employment, work habits, motivation, etc) would be great, I don't get this. If you actually read Eric Raymond's writing, most of it is based on real-world experience with the projects that he has worked on and those that he has had direct contact with. Netscape, for example, provides a wealth of data in their release of the Mozilla source. How much work can be harnessed from the community? Look at the changelogs....

    Same goes for things like GNOME. We know exactly how fast a given sized group of hackers can put together a large Open Source software effort, because we've seen it.

    What we don't have numbers for, and I don't think that a survey can establish this any better than ESR can, is this: what happens if your company wants to create an Open Source effort around your product? Answering that requires the answers to these questions:
    1. Do you have a product that will entice developers to work on it?
    2. Are you willing to spend time and energy in the beginning to assure the developer community that you're for real, and actually care about what happens to the code?
    3. Is there a competing effort (or reason to create one) that more developers will be interested in?

    For example, if Sun opened up the source to their C++ compiler, I'm sure the GCC/EGCS folks would enjoy getting a look at how Sun handles some of the SPARC optimization, but I can't see a lot of developers clustering in to help Sun develop their product. It's just not technically interesting enough. It's not portable, it has less than 5 language front-ends and it just doesn't have the clout in the community that GCC has.

    On the other hand, if Adobe were to open up the source to Illustrator, and really convince the community that they wanted to jump in with both feet, the way Netscape did, they would have a huge developer interest.

    In the end, Open Source is not so much a "phenomenon". This is the way software worked pre-80's. Hiding source seemed to make about as much sense to most people as trying to hide how a lightbulb works. Now, we're coming full circle, and people are cluing in to that. The "Open Source Phenomenon" is just a bunch of people trying to figure out how to make the intervening 20 years of industry make sense....
  • The only people who would be phazed by "bad press" regarding Linux would certainly not be using it anyway. If someone who has not heard of Linux sees so-called "bad press", they were not using Linux. However, it may pique their interest.
  • this is the linux era, the information age, they can't study our collective (don't think borg) using typical means. it's retardedness. no university team of researchers with on-line poll forms will be able to figure anything about linux out. (except that a lot of linux skript kiddies like to f@C# 5H1T uP. heck a lot of ms bottle fed skript kiddies [my 22yo self included] like to mess with crap too. it's information age grafitti, man!) my suggestion: use a list like the one redhat used to offer stock options. get email addresses from kernel updates and study the movement and it's implications that way, the long way. the correct way. but i agree, it was a non-story. typical.
  • I can't help but agreeing with this article. I run a website that generates large amounts of emails from newbies, and I find that dealing with the emails takes up a large chunk of my time and in fact lowers the quality of the website itself. It's probably the same thing in the linux world; the more newbies there are asking stupid questions to people who could be more valuable doing better things for linux, the less gets done. This brings us the the question of whether we WANT newbies using linux... is it better to be the "esoteric operating system," or is the final goal have everyone in the world, regardless of computer experience, using Linux?
  • Wait until all of the media attention, currently focused on Microsoft, reveals unstablity and lack of security in MS Windows. Then MS will be in trouble.

    Gotta go, I have to contact Eric Allman on howto write my Sendmail config file.
  • i was under the impression there are just lots of us taking the polls/survey if we are interested when it is on /. mebbe some people are trying hard to skew the results but i think the mass majority just answers the questions
  • I think that what will happen is that the "big guys" will spend less time coding. But "many hands make light work."

    Think about Linus. In the very early days he did it ALL by himself. Now he does very little coding (as far as I understand).

    I think this pattern will "trickle down" to other big name developers, who will find themselves being the "executives" of their project or area of development.
  • by jht ( 5006 ) on Saturday October 23, 1999 @12:25PM (#1592776) Homepage Journal
    It's not like excessive media attention hurts "Linux, the company". Linux is, fundamentally, an operating system that is built for the use and pleasure of those who develop it. For most of the developers, it's a hobby, and only a few (albeit a high-placed few) are paid to develop Linux. Most packages are built simply because a small group of people think it'd be useful to have software Foo, so they hack on Foo.

    Even if Linux, the commercial proposition, died tomorrow, we'd still have a bunch of handy distros that are sold for the sake of convenience, but built for the love of the system.

    Andrew Leonard has been pretty good at covering the movement, but the thing that he (and most others) tends to miss is that the traditional rules just don't apply to Linux. If they did, we wouldn't have gotten this far.

    - -Josh Turiel
  • Is it just me, or did they just define what an open source evangelist is for. That's why we have Eric S. Raymond, Chris DiBona, etc. They are the media hypers -- they are the ones that are cool. I do OSS development a bit, and I know people that do it pretty hardcore -- I don't think any of them getting irritated when someone says, "Hey man! Great job, I have this problem though..."
    I actually enjoy it a bit when I get feedback, even if they are reporting bugs/help, etc.
    Linux will get media hype, that's a definite -- it just means that we'll have more evangelists, that enjoy speaking about Linux than writing code, which those people are just as important as the programmers.
    I personally love it when people come up to me and say, "Hey -- I heard about that linux thing in and it looks pretty cool, but does it run on windows?" -- I often times wear nerd shirts (Including free shirts from VA,etc) -- then they get enlightened when I say that it is a replacement for windows, they ask where to get more info, and I give them a list of about 5-10 URL's to check out. Silly me.. aside from me I can't think of any developers that get their valuable time taken away. Thank you, drive through.
    -= Making the world a better place =-
  • As far as the average consumer is concerned, repeated media attention instills product recognition in the mind. Couple this with the noticeable shelfspace given to certain flavors of Linux at stores like Best Buy and CompUSA and you have people thinking, "hmmm, I've been hearing about that lately - maybe I will try it". It's understandable that some people who have been using Linux for a few years or more nay feel alienated by the fact that it's becoming accessible to the average consumer. But hey, it's Open Source.
  • by Foogle ( 35117 )
    Are you serious? "The Linux Era"? It may be the information age (relatively speaking), but Linux doesn't have anything to do with it. Neither does Windows. They're just operating systems. They serve the purpose of making information accessible, but they are insignificant in-and-of-themselves.

    And that's precisely what this is all about. People who take Linux too seriously. I've got no truck leaving Linux on a whim. It serves my purposes for the time being, but I'm not going to break a sweat trying to beat it into the media or writing flame-email to a CEO who didn't spell Alan Cox' last name correctly. It's not worth the time. Open Source, is great, and I do care about that, but the specific code (like Linux) aren't that important to me.

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • by Foogle ( 35117 ) on Saturday October 23, 1999 @12:38PM (#1592780) Homepage
    Are we seeing some overanalyzation here in the computer industry? For some reason everyone wants to be a techno-pundit and give the definitive answer to why things work the way they are. Sure, this is helpful, but with the amount we're getting now, it's just overkill.

    I care as much about OpenSource/Linux as the next guy, but I'm sick of reading journalists and web-publishers telling us why something is the way it is. Here's the truth: Stuff happens in complex systems and to try to explain it using two or three examples (like Linux and Apache to explain Open Source) is silly. The computer industry is complicated and I guess I'm just tired of all this hoopla over stuff.

    My point? If you like something, and you believe in it, then do it. Write the code you find useful and use the programs you like. Stop worrying whether Linux will overtake Microsoft. Don't lose any sleep over how the Mozilla project is doing. Use what works, and work on what doesn't -- Or don't. But talk is cheap and predictions are even cheaper.

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • by Laxitive ( 10360 ) on Saturday October 23, 1999 @12:38PM (#1592781) Journal
    As far as I can see, there is _nothing_ to analyze about open source coding. It can be explained in a simple demonstration:

    A: Hey, check out this (algorithm/program/driver) I wrote.
    B: That's pretty cool, can I take a look at it?
    A: Sure [mails foo.tar.gz]
    B: oh man, that's a lot of global variables you're using there
    A: I know, gotta get around to fixing that
    B: here have this patch, I've managed to kill about half of the globals [mails foo.patch]
    A: that rocks, thanks!

    scale, repeat

    -Laxative
  • Maybe Yahoo was refering to this section of Salon.com [salon.com]
    Its the closest section about Free Software/Open Source and Linux.
    ---
  • Yes, the linux era. I am serious. look at the differences that the information age, and within that, open source, and the poster child for open source, linux, is making in our society! look at your own life, now take out computers. now take out open source. what differences would there be if the open source movement died tomorrow, or never existed? where would the open source movement be without the linux hype of the last year-or-so? Linux IS open source. there is a 'richest man ever in the history of the world' (read: william gates III) right now, who is making (most of) his money from selling software. and that software is being threatened by software that is free, customizable, ultra-stable, and growing by leaps and bounds. do you think windows2K will be more stable than linux? do you think that linux will not continue to become better, faster than w2k? IMHO linux will be a feasible alternative to corporate users in the near future, and not at the level that UNIX was and is, but at the level that WINNT is now- on the desktop for the average worker. right now it isn't feasible. but it will be sooner than you think, sir. there is too much $MONEY$ at stake to just let ms continue to hold a monopoly over the desktops of america (read: world). with a tiny computer movement and a bunch of corporate money behind them, bill and steve started the information age. with a giant movement behind them, and tons of corporate money behind them, the Flavoured Penguins are going to take it to the next level. IMHO. hehehe.
  • I would say the best places would be newsgroups and irc, also always read the MAN files and faqs. And never forget the power of a good book (Oreilly books are very good at covering tech information, i.e. linux in a nutshell, also nice books for linux user[i do use freebsd btw] for redhat and i believe the other one is debian. But yeah, basically you don't want to waste the developers time, also they usually will have lots of mailing lists set up, subscribe subscribe subscribe.
  • I think you might be getting caught up here. It's easy to think that Linux is the second coming of Christ when you read slashdot and hear about what's going on with Open Source. But the reality is that most people have never heard of Linux and don't have a clue what source code is. Really, the average user doesn't give a damn about licenses.

    Linux might overtake Windows. Then again, it might not. The bottom line is that the end result won't make a huge difference on computing. The real revolutionary stuff isn't tied down to specific operating systems because it's mostly hardware related.

    Take speech-recognition for example. It will inevitably replace the majority of keyboard text entry -- I think that's a safe bet. But it doesn't have anything to do with any particular platform. You could write a speech-recognition engine for any platform that can handle a microphone. The only thing it depends on is CPU power and software algorithms. Any algorithm that depends on an OS isn't worth looking at.

    So Linux? It's nice, yeah, but I'd leave it in a second if something better came along. So while I'll invest my time in making Linux better, I won't kid myself in thinking that it's anything special. It's just an OS. A tool that I use to run my programs with.

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."


  • The Slashdot Headline has very little to do with "why media attention could be bad for Linux development." This issue is brought up in the first paragraph, but is stated in order to bring the real point of the story in a silly by-the-way manner. Did either the submittor or the moderator _read_ the article?

    The article itself doesn't say anything except, "Gee, I wonder if this study will get Slashdotted." There isn't a single hard fact in the whole thing, except that there's going to be an acedemic study about Linux GUIs, and that the name of the study is a bad pun of a song by the Kingsmen.

    Bad Slashdot. No biscuit.
    Bad Salon (or whoever wrote this silly thing) No biscuit.

  • http://sunsite.unc.edu [unc.edu]. You can find a whole lot of how-to's and faq's and other stuff.

    That's my $(2^4*3+1/7%3*2/100)
  • We can't take over the world without the help of journalists willing to give us a good spin. So once we manage to crush ZD with our collective might, taking over should be a piece of cake. What? You think it's a coincidence that ZD's never managed to run Linux well? Hah! So niave! Soon there won't be a computer on the planet that will be happy in ZD labs! Mua ha ha ha ha! Ahem...
  • Hmmm... Yes and no. I see your point, but keep in mind that what we're seeing now is the business equivalent of an auto-immune reaction in the human body. The corporate world is trying to figure out if we're a good thing or a bad thing, and until they do so, they cannot afford to let their guard down.

    This may sound melodramatic, but keep in mind that many businesses fail exactly because they are not paranoid enough. Once open source software has been accepted as harmless, you see a lot less of this sort of thing, but that will take some really amazing success stories.

    This is the two-edged sword of business involvement. Several years ago, we all wanted to see how far all this could go. Now, we see how far it will go, and some of us, I suspect, are getting cold feet. Yes, the future of Linux is going to be more in marketing than in what the code actually does. Yes, Apache's biggest hurdle in the next 5 years will be building "vertical markets" (whatever the heck those are), and you'll hear no end of it all if you can still stand to read the trade rags.

    Nature of the beast. People like RMS thought they could change the world. What they all failed to consider is how much the world would absorb their work and go right on acting like nothing had happend. That's what humans do. Otherwise, we'd still be sitting in a corner kibbying over the implications of the wheel.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    And if I remember correctly the person dressed up as someone from StarWars was none other than ESR. It really gives a ton of credibility to the Linux community when one of the chief spokesmen looks like a fool. True you can't judge every Linux advocate by any single person, but he is so high profile that's what many non tech folks will go by.
  • 1) Write Software
    a) Begin Design
    b) Argue with Marketing about feature excess
    c) Argue with Management about timetable
    d) Learn Hindi (to talk to your programmers)
    e) Write code
    f) Debug partially
    g) Run out of time
    2) Sell Software
    3) Make lots of money
    4) Aftermath
    a) Find horrible bug that kills the computer
    b) Find security flaw
    c) Release patch
    d) Find more bugs and holes
    3) Package all patches and fixes into SomeSoftware 2.0
    a) Charge $100 for new version
  • I agree, coding is going to stay in the domain of keyboarding for the most part. It defitely takes longer to say "comma" than to type ",". But speech recognition is going to compliment keyboards, and inevitably cause the average user to stop learning to type. Take it for what it's worth.

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • I can't help but agreeing with this article.... This brings us the the question of whether we WANT newbies using linux...

    What a great point to bring up! I've been waiting for this subject to pop up for a while. Here's my angle:

    This reminds me of something my friend said to me. I was lamenting about how unfriendly the Linux install and setup was to people new to the system, particularly for people new to computers in general. He replied, "no offense, but we, I mean the people who develop Linux, don't really give a damn about those kind of people."

    Needless to say, I took offense. It is kind of hard not to.

    Now, I understand that point of view. It makes sense for most of the hobiests and moonlighting developers of Linux. But I find it terminally sad that there isn't somebody out there that cares about the newbies. As a "community," if there is such a thing, I'd think you'd be insulted that companies like Microsoft think that they have a better handle on user friendliness than you do.

    For the concept of training new developers, it makes perfect sense to be surly and cold towards the newbies. Forcing them to Read The Flatulant Manual first is actually a good exercise. And then after reading the manual having to put the ecoteric connections together breeds a better programmer. And if Linux is only for programmers, that's fine.

    And it made me feel smart having to do all that. It was fun.

    But, isn't there somebody out there in the development world who thinks that an OS like Linux, with the quality of Linux, could be developed for the layperson?

    Wouldn't it just be damned neat?

    Can it not be done?

    Of course, I'm an art student, and I don't program worth beans. Maybe that's why I care. And maybe my opinion doesn't count in this, because I can't contribute the code. And since I can't contribute the code, I'm not part of the community.

    I love Linux, I use it. I love /., it rocks. But attitudes blackenned against the welcoming of new users just leave the public cold, and are bad overall for any sort of movement. And if there is indeed a movement, like OSS. Then somebody needs to put some thought into this.

    1. 1) Write Software
      1. a) Begin Design
      2. b) Argue with Marketing about feature excess
      3. c) Argue with Management about timetable
      4. d) Learn Hindi (to talk to your programmers)
      5. e) Write code
      6. f) Debug partially
      7. g) Run out of time
    1. 2) Sell Software
    1. 3) Make lots of money
    1. 4) Aftermath
    2. a) Find horrible bug that kills the computer
    3. b) Find security flaw
    4. c) Release patch
    5. d) Find more bugs and holes 3) Package all patches and fixes into SomeSoftware 2.0 a) Charge $100 for new version
  • Sorry for the messed up replies. I tried making it look organized. never again!
  • by Foogle ( 35117 ) on Saturday October 23, 1999 @02:20PM (#1592802) Homepage
    I have no problem falling back onto the "a computer is just a tool" argument. It's absolutely true. Yes, they have a definite socioeconomic impact on our society (especially since the advent of the WWW), but that doesn't change the reality of the situation. That being, Linux != computing in the same sense that Windows != computing. It's a great OS, no doubt about it, but that's all. Something better will come along (probably fairly soon) and Linux will become a fixture of the past. A memorable one, of course, but that's it.

    Tux the penguin has nothing revolutionary going for him. It's just an implementation of Unix. It's a good one, but it's still comparable to Solaris and others.


    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • There are just good reporters and bad reporters, good agencies and bad agencies. Though it might seem like Ted Turner and Rupert Murdoch control everything in the news, there's one important thing to remember:

    There exist people in this world that are open to the truth, and there exist people in this world that will be forever ignorant. The latter will always be the majority.

    So please, say "bad article" when reading crap like this, but don't fall into the same trap the deluded reporter fell into. Acknowledge that if every media agent was as clueless and careless as Andrew Leonard, we might as well live in a propagandized state.

    But also acknowledge that there are a lot more reporters who get it.

    On the other hand, reporters (especially for those with a general audience) are supposed to write their stories from the perspective of someone clueless. It illustrates how shallow one's point of view can be.

    So in that case, it just goes to show how confused people can be about Linux. This is something I'm assuming everyone reading /. already knows.

    J.
  • by Foogle ( 35117 ) on Saturday October 23, 1999 @02:27PM (#1592804) Homepage
    Oh, and I'm also sick of the analogies, did I mention that?

    Sorry - back to the topic at hand: I don't think that companies will see Open Source as being "harmless". I'm all for Open Source. It's better for the end-user. But it's far from harmless to software companies. To develop software through open source, companies have to pay developers less. Don't kid yourself about support. Read the GNU manifesto, if you need an outside opinion - Programmers don't have to go hungry, but they won't rack in the bucks through free software.

    In case you haven't noticed, I'm not sure that Open Source is the wave of the future. It remains to be seen, in my eyes, whether OS isn't just an industry fad. Only time will tell...

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  • by Anonymous Coward
    Well here's my 2 cents[I want my change back :)]
    You're always going to have that attitude to a certain degree, because Linux will always *need* programmers (success or not). As for 'laypersons' it is not all that unreasonable for the community to ask that the ones coming in have at least the willingness to learn. And at most for them to contribute to the best of their ability. If we were the 'proprietary' industry what newbies could do would be much differant, but we're a community and the rules are different. Were you'll see problems is caused by newbies coming in and wanting to change the community[ make in thy own image], and the community will resisting the change(s).

    In answer to your questions can it be done? Short answer is yes. You say you can't code, but you're an art student. Join either the Gnome or KDE teams the gui's could use the touch of someone with an artistic bent. You could join up with a writer and help with documentation. The possibilaties are endless let your imagination wander on that.

  • This is the way I see things. Large opensource projects usually have maintainers of a certain area - pieces of code and whatnot. Why not have a certain person be the "PR Maintainer" - "all emails should be addressed to foo.bar@project.org. Any media queries sent to the developers will be ignored and deleted unread."

    This guy could also maintain the website, for example, or run the announcement mailing list. In fact, I'd be surprised if there aren't major projects out there not doing this already.

    You don't have to be a coder to help with the coding ;-)

  • Bouncing blue screens, a trash can filled with monstrous splash screens. Please God Wake Me.
  • There you go confusing Star Trek and Star Wars again. See, if ESR dressed up as someone from Star Trek the protest would have been taken more seriously.

    ;)

    ***Beginning*of*Signiture***
    Linux? That's GNU/Linux [gnu.org] to you mister!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday October 23, 1999 @03:39PM (#1592810)
    The thing that really sucks about Media attention is that most of them have no idea what they're talking about. There are exceptions -- Petreley, Leonard, etc., but most journalists have never even seen Linux run.

    I've worked for the last four years as a developer for media institutions, and I've seen how they operate. I've seen positive stories written about Linux, and I've seen negative stories written. However, I've seen very few stories written by people who know Linux.

    I don't like journalism, and I don't like writting. But, I feel that it's important that I do write about Linux in the press, only because there are so few people that know what they are talking about. And to be honest, I don't see the situation changing -- not too many journalists are going to be picking up Linux any time in the near future. And, I honestly believe that when and if the initial hype over Linux dies down, the fact that few journalists know Linux will ultimately hurt the system.

    So what's the solution? Well, I'll continue to write pieces occassionally for publication. And, if you can write, I suggest that you write articles as well. It's easy -- did you write good essays in English? If so, you can probably write for publication. Write a piece -- it's easier if it's something you believe in -- and contact the editor of some magazine. Ask them if they'll read your article. If it's any good, they'll run it. It's also easier to get published on the Web (and possibly more effective) -- paper's expensive.

    Cheers,
    Travis

  • Well, by its very nature, "open source" is a kind of marketing buzzword. It was designed to be that way, because the term "free software" was considered too "threatening" to big business. Certain elements of the free software community, including RMS, weren't particularly concerned with this, IIRC. After all, the objective was to create and promote free software, not to court proprietary software.

    Besides, as I pointed out in an earlier conversation, companies had already started producing distributions of GNU/Linux some time before "open source" was coined, and because of the Internet and the Web, we don't need "big business" to help us out with distribution. Anyone who wants, can get. Back in the day it wasn't so simple. You had to have some corporate backing so that they would produce your product en masse for anyone who wanted it to have access to it.

    Since those rules have changed, part of ESR foundation for his efforts, that he doesn't want to see another hacker project "fail" even though it is technically superior, is highly unfounded. The corporate machine is not needed to drive accesibility and/or popularity in this case. That must be hard to see for some, but it seems painfully obvious..

    That said, hey, AJS, while I will begin by saying I do indeed have the deepest respect for you, I might inquire what you meant by "Several years ago, we all wanted to see how far all this could go."? What I mean is this: Did you mean the free software community in general, hackers in general, etc.? Neither of the above would make sense with such a blanket statement because not everyone shares the same outlook. Far from it, of course. ;)

  • Open-source hackers, organizing at hubs like Slashdot, are notorious for rushing en masse at new Web surveys and submitting their answers multiple times in brazen attempts to skew the data one way or another.

    Media like THIS is bad for any movement. I never seen a link to a survey here, let alone received a secret handshake and told to *wink* vote early and often.

    Maybe Andrew Leonard aleonard@salon.com [mailto] doesn't think there really is so much open-source support out there, and it must all be propaganda. Feel free to mail his editor at letters@salon.com. [mailto]

  • Linus did more of it himself back in the "very early days" (unless, of course, you mean that as in "the days before he ever posted anything about his kernel to comp.os.minix"), but he didn't go it alone for very long. IIRC, he had a fair share of help before approaching a 1.0 release, and certainly before it was the friendliest kernel in the world. ;) Actually, the only truly worthwhile thing about the book, Open Sources (besides hearing Linus slam Emacs, among other things.. and no, I'm not a vi fan, I'm an Emacs fan, but I still think its funny! ;), is the appendix which has compiled a number of the postings from comp.os.minix, which revolve around an argument between AST and Torvalds, but has a healthy dose of information contained within them.

    The introduction, on the other hand, only serves to prove how clueless the editing staff is, even if most of what they say was true. The some of it that wasn't was really.. sad. =P

  • ..the hub around which hackers organize their efforts! *cough* get a life idiot media types *cough* ever heard of Usenet? *cough* Seriously, though, people who work on projects in the free software community tend to organize their efforts around the most unlikely of things.. like the developer's mailing list for the project(s) in question? (and what's this damn CVS thingie!? ok, so I'm not being totally serious.. who cares? you'll get my point or you won't)

    During the cDc discussion someone was saying how cDc made "us" [Slashdot] look like a bunch of hackers who were concerned with our public image, and this was somehow exemplified by the hacker/cracker debate that would go on for years to come. There is, however, a glaring contradiction. Any hacker (and indeed, anyone motivated enough to look at the Jargon File or read a copy of John Levy's Hackers.. or, for that matter, exist for very long around somehow who is clued in) knows what a hacker is, and what a cracker is. Anyone who thinks the terms mean the same thing, or that "cracker is only a food product", is obviously not a hacker.

    The other interesting note is this: how many hackers really care about their "public image"? If that was really the case, there would be more of an effort to debunk the media's inappropriate usage of the term. But then, I haven't seen any Web sites chalk full of hacker != cracker propaganda (that is, it is devoted solely to that purpose), which is likely what it would take a /lot/ of. Point is, most hackers prefer to spend their time, hmm.. hacking? ESR is not our "brain leader" (less people agree with him than he or the media seems to think, at least with regards to any number of his "major" stances on issues.. I doubt anyone disagrees with /everything/ he does/says). Hackers are not Borg. Most boring, pointless generalizations will fail to stick, and only serve to prove that the speaker really doesn't understand the topic of their discourse.

    So, since there is so much controversy on the subject, it seems reasonable to conclude that, indeed, most of Slashdot's readership does not include hackers. This is "News for Nerds", not "News for J. Random Hacker". Geeks, supposed uber geeks, and yes, hackers, read this site, but if you think most of the people here are hackers.. well.. heh. What can I say?

    Ok, now I'm going back to sleep. Maybe I'll wish I had edited this, because I tend to do some pretty odd things without caffeine and/or rest. ;)

  • Actually I did mean before the famous post. As I understand it was bootable (at least on HIS computer!) at that point.

    I also think he did much more on a day by day basis from the original post to 1.0 then he has been lately.

    Of course this is all based on highly questionable sources on the internet!

    Anyway, I stand behind the idea that it is a "normal" open source phenomenon for the "key" developer(s) to become the "manager(s)" of an OSS project.

    -Peter
  • by RobertW103 ( 54252 ) on Saturday October 23, 1999 @05:52PM (#1592819)
    Media attention on Linux is just that, attention. There are good and bad points, I have a short film on the subject. Would someone please get the lights?

    Good Effects: Joe User walks into Software Hut and sees a box of {insert your fav. distro here} sitting on a shelf. Thinks "Hey isn't this that new OS everyone's trying?" Joe has just supported the Cause. Due to supporting the Cause, Mr. Software company sees Joe's purchase and decides to build more apps, thus furthering the Cause. Joe may see something in the OS that he doesn't like, and may learn programming to fix it. Joe gets that nice feeling of accomplishment, posts fix to a user group and gets mild recognition for his discovery.

    Bad Effects: Joe User thinks that the install will be just like it is on Windoze and tries to use it on some non-supported stuff. Joe User is not familiar with the concept of checking for a more recent build or drivers. Joe User is fustrated by lack of boxed software and keeps on using Ms Windows. More people start to think that Linux can "Save the World" and get really upset when they find that "Yes, it breaks like any other piece of software out there"

    As a community we really to need to make sure that the Media knows that Linux is not a cure-all, yet. It is an excellent option for someone who knows what they are doing and is not afraid to tinker. We must avoid the "Holier-then-thou" mentality that I see perodically affecting the Mac world. Most newbies are really skittish about not being comfortably in the majority where each need is attended to by some thing you are not allowed to change. This is a brave new world gentlemen, and we must see that the way is made ready for the huddled masses yearning to breath free. I ask each of you to take a newbie in hand and explain to them the ins and outs, don't send them packing off to a FAQ without an explanation. Remember, you were once new as well.

    But, in all seriousness, whatever attention Linux gets at this point is good. Look at what John C. Davorak did for the iBook.
  • At least they used the term "hackers" in its real meaning. Quite refreshing read this in a place like Yahoo, even if the article originated from elsewhere. (Salon seems to be a bit more clueful about these things than most media outlets.)

  • Media attention can be bad for Linux and the OSS community, but only if it deludes the community into playing by the media's rules. You see, you have to understand how the media operates.

    Take political coverage, for example. In politics, liberals complain that the media is biased towards conservatives, and conservatives complain that the media is biased towards liberals. Both camps are missing the point. The media does have a bias, all right, but it's not towards liberals or conservatives -- it's towards controversy, which sells newspapers and attracts eyeballs. Thus, the Prime Directive is, if controversy exists, great; if not, find something that could be construed as controversial and put it front and center -- even if the controversy is artificial.

    You can see this same dynamic occuring in coverage of the open source movement. Every journalist who wants to write about Linux wants to do so in the context of Linux vs. Windows. When will Linux push Windows off the desktop? This is the only question journalists care about. Why? Because it's dramatic -- and it's easy to get people to pay attention to a story with inherent drama.

    The problem with this is, a story about Linux vs. Windows isn't, when you think about it, really about Linux. Linux is just filling the "designated MS challenger" role in these stories -- ten years ago it would have been Apple, five years ago Netscape, now it's Linux. It's an artificial controversy. Nobody here really believes that Linux is ready for the consumer desktop, right? What's important is that Linux is smacking NT around in the server space, Apache is wiping the floor with IIS in web serving, etc.

    But the danger here is if people in the community start believing those stories -- and decide that Linux's destiny is to kill MS. This fits the media's agenda more than it does the community's, because it will stir up huge amounts of controversy around something that's basically very silly. And then, because Linux isn't really ready for the desktop yet, the media will declare MS the winner, and go looking for the next story -- and the bubble of interest in Linux will burst. It's the classic game from the schoolyard, "Let's You and Him Fight", writ large -- and just like in the schoolyard, it'd be a mistake to get suckered into playing.

  • But, isn't there somebody out there in the development world who thinks that an OS like Linux, with the quality of Linux, could be developed for the layperson?

    Somebody has. They're called TiVo [tivo.com] . :-)

    Seriously, though -- it's an interesting question. IMHO, Linux will get more suited for the consumer desktop when one of two things happen:

    • Someone gets annoyed at the lack of a truly newbie-friendly Linux and voluntarily hacks one out. Probability: highly unlikely, as the people who are most likely to find this annoying (non-technical newbies) are also the least likely to be able to do anything about it! How many users in the mass-market do you think come equipped with programming skills, or are willing to learn said skills just to get their OS to work better?
    • Someone finds it's in their economic interest for a newbie-friendly Linux to exist, so they develop it. Probability: unlikely (though more likely than the first option), because nobody will make a killing selling desktop Linux until the applications are there to make switching from Windoze worthwhile -- and application developers won't come until the user base is large enough to make it worth THEIR while. Classic chicken-and-egg quandary. (It's possible the release of StarOffice may get things started here, though.)

    I would say that the best prospects for a consumer-friendly Linux aren't in the realm of general-purpose computing, but rather in specialized devices like the TiVo, where consumers are going to expect a crash-free user experience, and you can expect once you get the device configured nobody's going to tinker with it. (Good luck building a crash-free appliance around WinCE!) Which is actually probably good news for Linux, since there'll probably be more growth in demand for these devices in the next several years than there will be for desktop PCs anyway...

  • The reason that journalists and web publishers try to overanalyze trends is very simple. Their readers/subscribers are concerned about the unknown and what it all means.

    They want to know: do I brush up on my Unix skills and get Red Hat Linux certification? For my Oracle skills, should I be W2K certified, or is *nix certification more marketable?

    We know where the future is going, but they don't.

  • Right ... so we have a few people dressed up as Borg and a few other characters. They'll look much more professional ...

  • Almost but not quite.

    If you are a newbie it is okay to ask questions to gurus as long as you tell them that you have looked for the information and give them some idea that you know what you are doing. Don't worry about being flammed unless you are being a jerk. Half the gurus are jerks themselves. You need to sound confident and not desperate.

    I speak from personal experience.

    ***Beginning*of*Signiture***
    Linux? That's GNU/Linux [gnu.org] to you mister!
  • Salon is actually, a pretty good web magazine most of the time, which is probably why the guy said "I couldn't find it."

    Most of their Linux articles are pro-Linux.
  • He replied, "no offense, but we, I mean the people who develop Linux, don't really give a damn about those kind of people." ... I find it terminally sad that there isn't somebody out there that cares about the newbies.

    You are talking about one guy, how can you make a generalization from that? There are obviously lots of people involved with Linux that care about newbies - who do you think is putting together the new graphical installs, the KDE gui stuff, etc, etc? Who writes all the howtos? And there are lots of Linux companies coming into the game that care a lot about newbies. There are also zillions of people out there hanging on chat channels for the express purpose of helping newbies (incidently, most of them are hardly out of the newbie category themselves).

    Just remember that if you're a complete newbie, you have to be careful not to jump into the middle of forums where developers are exchanging ideas and start grabbing the bandwidth for yourself. Better to just sit and lurk, soak up what you can, then go off to find a more suitable forum for your questions.
  • lighten up...whats cool about linux culture is EXACTLY that - a well-respected leader who dresses up as a starwars character represents the fun in it. when linux leaders get sober and profit-oriented like gates or ballmer,then the game is up.
  • Is your media single or double density?

    Have you developed a proper maintenance schedule for your media? Checked for bad sectors and lost files?

    Have you defragmented lately?

    Do you make frequent backups?

    Not only is media attention good for Linux, its good for any OS.

  • [Linux]'s a great OS, no doubt about it, but that's all. Something better will come along (probably fairly soon) and Linux will become a fixture of the past. A memorable one, of course, but that's it.

    Tux the penguin has nothing revolutionary going for him. It's just an implementation of Unix. It's a good one, but it's still comparable to Solaris and others.

    Yes and no. The greatest difference isn't the specific technology but the development model. In a commercial world where a company wants to make a profit, it doesn't pay off to keep working on a released product, it's more profitable to publish a new full version instead of just an update. Whatever is released is already outdated at the time of public retail, the creators are already working on a better version that is supposed to replace the old one once it isn't selling well enough anymore. The moment you buy some new software, it's already old stuff for the producer, they don't want to fix it (for existing customers) but concentrate on the successor (which is supposed to bring them more new customers). That's why products die and are replaced so quickly in the commercial world.

    But Linux is different. The latest technology is already there right now, publically available for all who're interested (i.e. developers), open to be examined and enhanced. That's the special thing about Open Source. Sure, there are many other benefits, but the best thing is the guaranteed evolution. Open source software will be maintained as long as there is interest, and with all the time and energy invested in Linux already, people won't just drop it once something "better" comes along. Instead it can be made better all the time, it is actively evolved, it thrives in the open (contrary to commercial proprietary products). The philosophy is not to reinvent the wheel all the time, a problem should be solved only once, so all that energy can be used for other work that has not been done before. Sometimes there are drastic changes but thanks to Linux's open source nature, it's pretty easy to adapt it to a different environment, and you can always keep the theory and design principles if the actual code ever became useless (Quantum computing or something totally different from our binary computers). If anything, it's Linux and other open source projects that have best chances to be useful and up-to-date for a long time to come...

  • I'm not a Linux developer, but I write about Linux and maintain a hopefully-useful set of Linux resources on my website. Serious, well-thought-out questions from newbies are always welcome, and I'm happy to spend some time giving them a helpful answer; trouble is, I don't seem to get many. The most typical question is most succintly paraphrased as, "would you do my homework for me, please?". Now that pisses me off. It does seem that some newcomers to Linux just don't get it. For me, Linux is first and foremost about doing it yourself. Sure, if you run into trouble, ask away; but the basic dedication to hacking at problems has to be there. Hell, the amount of Linux information on the Web now means that most problems can be solved by RTFM, given a sufficiently large value for `M'!
  • This quotation tells us that the author has read /. now and again, has seen the usual jokes when an on-line survey is mentioned: "go get 'em, boys", etc, and has taken these comments a tad more seriously than they warranted. Andrew, those people were joking!.
  • Actually I did mean before the famous post. As I understand it was bootable (at least on HIS computer!) at that point.

    Of course, that could either be when he announced the project or when the AST vs. Torvalds debate began. I believe it was bootable at that point as well (before either, actually, though I could be wrong.. I haven't looked into it that much because I wasn't /that/ concerned).

    Hopefully you didn't regard my reply as any kind of attack. After all, I used a qualifier, which has now been cleared up. *grin*

    I also think he did much more on a day by day basis from the original post to 1.0 then he has been lately.

    Yeah, especially now, what with Transmeta and all. I believe he spends more time rejecting so-called kludges and having people who want their code in the kernel rewriting it a few times than doing any actual code himself, which is fine, though amusing, given the "history" the media suggests surrounding Linux. Ha!

    Of course this is all based on highly questionable sources on the internet!

    Face it, all sources are highly questionable unless you /are/ the source. Sucks, but it's true. I sure don't trust the media at /all/ since I can debunk most of their techno-babble. If they don't research anything, how can I be assured of their veracity? Ugh. I need better quality news..

    Anyway, I stand behind the idea that it is a "normal" open source phenomenon for the "key" developer(s) to become the "manager(s)" of an OSS project.

    Quite true. Whether or not the key development team remains the maintainers is entirely another story, however. .. ;)

  • Sure, "the media" does not exist. But if you look at the kind of coverage Linux gets in "mainstream" media, you will see that Andrew Leonard is far more clueful than most. Be fair to the guy: he can't be right 100% of the time (neither can you or I). The stuff about "excessive media attention" was just a tag-line, anyway. The focus of this little piece was the "application of quantitative data gathering tactics" to the Open Source phenomenon. The qoute about ESR is exactly right: all his papers on the subject rely exclusively on annecdotal evidence. There's nothing wrong with this, but it is a limitation. The remark about "tampering", while a little silly in refering to the hords of /.-crazed hackers madly rushing from poll to poll `skewing the data', still makes a valid point -- how do researchers intend to stop the poll results being skewed? Is a form on a web page really random sampling anyway? Perhaps it would be better if people tried harder to pick out the essence of what a "Linux article" is saying, rather than getting hung up on the old "Media is clueless! Linux rules! Rah! Rah! Rah!" riff.
  • IF the University studies Open Source there will then become proof why Open Source is good. I, as a write of Open Source software, have gotton feedback and input from others because the program that I wrote was open source. When the University realizes that it is because a person ahs the source to modify and add and change and fix that makes Open Source work then there will be proof from an actual study that this is a better model of software development than closed source. Hell the company I work for gives much of its source code to its clients. Mainly because it is cobol, and runs on mainframes and there are no executables in this situation. But it seems to work okay. Internally the company has an open source between business units. Any business unit can take anothers source code for there prduct and use it modify it whatever they wish.
  • Yes, I agree. Exactly. Open Source is a way different state-of-being than commercial, capitalist, traditional product-type software. but this open source stuff will become commercial (see: redhat) and more commercial (see: redhat for the corporation) but at the same time it will always be open source.
    once people start using it at work, and kids start learning C in 4th grade, who knows what sort of stuff can happen, but open source will be at the core. open source makes better software than corporations (unless the corporation is exactly the right size, but it will rarely happen because when a company of 8 close friends makes awesome software, they become millionaires and stop coding) and thats what these university professors are interested in.
    but it's going to be tough because we're a bunch of 5h1t disturbers that won't think twice about skewing some lamer's website pole. but as i said before, the whole idea of trying a website pole is retarded and so is salon for thinking that pointing that out was news.

    don't worry everyone, i have finally figured out how to do a 'br' to start a new paragraph. {8']

  • hehehe. i love my keyboard. i could never stop typing. wheee.

    but one thing i do want is two clipboards. so like ctrl-x, ctrl-c, and ctrl-v deal with one set of copied text, and like ctrl1,ctrl2, ctrl3 deal with another set. so you can paste a big huge chunk, then another big huge chunk.
    get it? anyone?
    code it! call it Harvey.
    hehehe.

  • Subject says it all. Media attention is great when your OS|Application|Driver|Hardware|Whatever is on the growth part of its lifecycle, but it really stinks when your product is on the backend of the cycle and the next product comes along and steals the limelight.

    Like others have said here, the Media doesn't get Linux any more than they really get the elegence of shared memory. But the Media has become a fine-honed nose for that ineffable shift in social winds, and they pounce on it.

    So, in the case of Linux, what are they really sensing? There's several assumptions that have been laid down by interested parties in the IT industry that are being challenged by Linux:

    1) Quality software can't be created unless it is by a micro-managed team of programmers.

    2) The commercial marketplace will never stand for an 'unsupported' product for their mission-critical applications.

    3) Closed source software is inherently more secure than open source versions of same.

    4) The best programmers are motivated by money, not fame, or the satisfaction of producing a quality product.

    Obviously, we in the Linux community know these assumptions to be nothing but commercial pap. But as more commercial users quietly integrate Linux and its bretheren into their IT workloads, enlightenment occurs, and the established closed source companies start feeling pressure from lost sales and less control.

    That is the phenomenon that the Media senses and is reporting on. They may or may not connect the dots, and realise that the internet and linux have blown open the doors of information distribution in other ways, eventually toppling dictatorships and two-party systems alike. Now there is a story worthy of print.

    But beware: there will come a time when Linux is on the downslope of its lifecycle. Most of the hip hackers will have moved on to the Next Great Thing, and those who stubbornly cling to the glory days of linux will be viewed much like the BBS operators today who view the internet as the technology which put them out of business, and out of control of their own little domains.

  • The article was on Salon a day before..

    I was actually wondering why no one submited that story a long time ago.. Thought of doing that myself, but having submitted about 5/6 so far and having all of them rejected by our friendly CmdrTaco, I decided against it :)

    Maybe next time !!

    Manifest
  • Too, true.

    I imediately regretted the tone of my words and logic after I posted my reply. Although, I figured it would get some good responces anyways. I apologize.

    However, I was addressing an attitude that is prevalent in some people that really gets my goat. I suppose that's flamebait, but... I coulda worded it differently. I'm not a complete newbie, but I think that the newbie's first impression of things can be important sometimes. Don't you?

    Again, I apologize for my rashness.

  • If we were the 'proprietary' industry what newbies could do would be much differant, but we're a community and the rules are different. Were you'll see problems is caused by newbies coming in and wanting to change the community[ make in thy own image], and the community will resisting the change(s).

    Indeed. And despite my previous language, it should be no other way. Actually, it would be difficult to define a community as something that is so all inclusive. But these problems that arise can lead to some pretty good results, as well as some pretty bad results.

    The pressure might cause the community to close up and become xenophobic in some areas.

    It might cause it to refine its "imegrant" mechanism to increase or decrease the experience of the people allowed "in."

    And it might cause the community to suffer a grand paradigm shift, or to buckle completely and split.

    Or it might just change a few attitudes here and there, just enough to prevent too much strife with neighboring communities.

    I guess I was adding to the strife...

    Anyway, here's an interesting question for the benefit of us newbies: What seems to be happening along these lines in the OSS community?

    I wouldn't expect anyone to speak for the whole community, that'd be naive. But speculations would be interesting, no?

  • Well, I'm a Linux newbie, started last Nov, and I learned a lot about linux just because the media has been lately been so focussed on linux. I learned about slashdot.org through a blrb somewhere. The more people become aware about linux .. its strenghths and weaknesses too, the better OS it will continue to evolve into ;))) My 2 bits ;)
  • coding is going to stay in the domain of keyboarding for the most part. It defitely takes longer to say "comma" than to type ",".

    you might be wrong there - in a world of keyboards, programming languages are designed to be typeable, not pronounceable. yet who said this is the only way to describe algorithms exactly?

    i predict that when speech recognition is widely accepted, a coding language that could justly be called "talk" will come up. it will not look just like c, probably longer through replacement of characters by words and it will use keywords easily distinguishable by sound. maybe it will sound like mathematicians' talk.

    this is just such an idea i just had, maybe you can improve on it.

    Kiwaiti

Know Thy User.

Working...