[oclug]Re: Linux too hard?

[Tim Hosking]

On 26/11/02 11:01 am, "Michael P. Soulier" <msoulier at storm.ca> wrote:

<lot's of angry stuff>


Michael. Why do you take my comments about the weaknesses of Linux to be a
personal attack on yourself? That is just the kind of reaction that has
become commonplace in the open source community.

Just because Linux does many things better than it's 'rivals' (bad choice of
word there but you know what I mean) it does not mean that there is not
plenty of scope for improvement. Does it offend you that I have the gall to
say this?

For the record, I am happy to pay for Linux and it's software. I still pay
my $60 per year to RedHat, even though I no longer use it. The guys at
RedHat have been a driving force behind Linux for a long time now, and I
consider it a donation to a worthy cause. I now use Gentoo (I don't pay for
that) and Mandrake (ordering 9.0 ProSuite Edition next week). I don't
actually pay for OS X per-se, simply because Apple sends it to me for free
(after spending $2000 bucks a year on my ADA subscription I somehow feel
short-changed however). Please refrain from labelling me as a whining
freeloader (before you say I am putting words into your mouth, I should
point out that I am simply summarising you apparent attitude towards my
comments). Apart from my professional role as a Macintosh programmer, I also
spend a considerable amount of time coding for Linux. I have spent the past
six weeks testing various installation and upgrade procedures for Gentoo, as
well as beta testing various ebuilds for the Gentoo development team. When I
consider that any of my work is fit for human consumption, I will return it
to the community from whence it came. I think I have a right to an opinion.

Furthermore, I have never stated that there was anything wrong with any
software you have produced, simply because I have no idea what you have
produced. It was you who suggested that 'cryptic' software was often better
than 'easy' software. I cannot accept that for software to function
correctly and efficiently it needs to be cryptic. Cryptic == flawed. I am
not referring to the essential command line tools here (sed, grep, awk
etc..). With every graceful swan there is always a pair of ugly legs
paddling furiously just beneath the surface. But the sad truth remains that
the outward appearance of Linux is still that of an ugly duckling. It does
not need to be this way. If only the efforts of Linux developers could be
better coordinated then things will improve. I realise that this may seem
idealistic, but I'm an idealist. There is no harm in dreaming.

While I'm still in the mode of using tired analogies, I really don't care if
I am the only person in the crowd pointing out that the Emperor is not
wearing any clothes. In my last posting I raised the question of how OS X
managed to become what it has in such a short time. It just dawned on me
that the biggest single factor in it's success was the slogan - Think
Different.

-- 
Tim Hosking