CoolTechZone has written an article that talks about the Current problems with Linux

it is written in a mature calm and respectful way. Thought provoking.

and there aren't THAT many problems.

titanium_geek

Blasphemer! Idolater! Heretic!

Just kiddin'

Anyways, I read the article, and it does not seem to raise any valid points.


The article is nothing more than FOX-News style propaganda. Taking a few minor problems in the Management, distribution & support of Linux OS'es (that are not the fault of the OS but of the distributors, some developers, and companies that won't help support open-source drivers for their hardware) and blowing them out of proportion, and using those arguments to favor windoze over Linux?!?!?!!? I mean, who wrote this piece of crap, Bill O'Rielly? I could write a similar article about windoze and it would be so large it'd crash your browser! He conveniently forgets the performance, stability and security delivered by linux that can never be matched by windoze (My roommate just got a "KERNEL-STACK-INPAGE ERROR" BSOD off of his hard drive in windoze that's running Debian just fine when I installed it after getting rid of the windoze). A few dinky little hassles are worth it if you get to do cool stuff that your yuppie friends in Redmondland can only dream of (or pay $$$$$ to do), like build routers that are as powerful as a cisco routers, or build a dedicated PVR from an old P-3, or have superhard firewalls, or not have to worry about viruses ever, or whatever.

Point by point:


1 . "So, who makes Linux?"

Why is it so hard to understand? Is there only one company building planes, or cars or toasters? Can´t you choose between them?


2. Installation: agreed.

3. Post install: Its not every X install that will not start without editing. In fact these are going rare. The nvidia driver that comes with the installers is quite fine, if you don´t want to install the nvidia bloat proprietary driver. My debian sarge runs every dvd and mpeg and tv capture card with it.

4. Laptops: Go config acpi under win. Lots of troubles also. The thing is buggy.


5. Games: There are even specalized distros. Kurumin games is a brazilian one, won´t work for you guys. But they do exist.

6. Unfriendly gurus: No matter how usable and friendly the resources are, howto´s, hcl´s and tutos. Newbie will always ask the asked questions. I did it myself. Every one user that browses forums and tries to answer questions long enough, will eventually be pissed of with the load of repetitive questions.

7. Marketing. Do you need better marketing than a virus free OS?

8. Better documentation: My konqueror will answer my every man:question?? (no / needed, the simpler the better) without fear. Better awareness of it can only be pursued by the user, not by the system.

Its not that I don´t think linux can get better. Its just that I think the guy missed the point.

I forgot to mention that the article should be taken with a pinch of salt. Yeah he does miss the point (but then read the previous go linux articles.) in some respects, but he does have some valid points. Who makes linux? I like the toaster analogy, but then when talking software people often think software.

I didn't write it, I am not a financial benefactor/contributor/whatever of the site, I just thought you might like to have a look.

titanium_geek

Of course, I get it. Its always funny to reply to these kinds of arguments. I know its not easy for someone to step inside linux, but we can speak of it in a way as to encourage people. In the long run we'll benefit from having more adherents.

I am always consulted by my friends and their mothers/fathers about computing stuff (windows, mostly). When I speak of linux and its non-virose nature, peoples reactions go from partly disbelief to complete disbelief. They simply don't get it. I, like the suse guys say, have lots of fun. Windows users take as granted that a computer has to run virii. Think about that!

Also, when you have a more secure system, you can stop running 'middleware" such as antivirus, anti-trojan, anti-spy, anti-bloat, anti-winregistry, etc. Think about that, too: the lots of stuff win-user put inside just to get a computer running. Man, the cpu cycles and storage are supposed to be used by YOU.

Anyway, someone could write a good article about improving linux... The difficult task is defining what is "improving linux". Take a look at that incredible thread "Making linux easier.." somewhere here in LQ. For some, good is to have choices. For others, good is when the system chooses itself without asking. There's no centralized authority to drive development, and this is a great thing. We now have a variety of distros that will satisfy the most different kinds of users, from the minimalist to the mamoth. Not like win, which is a uncustomizable-monolithic-piece-of-bloat.

The article says in introduction that it is rethorical and that it might appear pointless, because it's essentially a collection of commonly use objections to using linux...

look bruno buys, quit it. I SAID that it was an interesting article. Punto. I agree with dukeinlondon. For your information I did see the thread that you mentioned. I am also considered a computer expert. I run a linux only system, I'm not a windows microsoft troll, I was only posting for interesting reading.

titanium_geek

ok, friend, no offense. sorry.