Are we grandfathers?
 

Thought you all might be interested in this short rant from techiemoe.com http://www.techiemoe.com/tech/slackware11.htm.

Moe apparently thinks that GUI installers and scripts that help do things to your system that you don't come close to understanding are a Good Thing, and therefore Slackware and Patrick are Bad.

Moe seems to miss the point that Linux has so many distributions because there are so many personal preferences involved in system choice. Apparently, every distro should be like Ubuntu or it won't get Moe's vote.

Frankly, I couldn't care less what Moe thinks.

Thats Moe and nothing more then an opinion. Who cares? I think Slack is fine and so do many other people. There are people who if wrote an article on any graphical installer would say the same thing about them. It's all bout choice! You like Slack....Use it...Mandriva....Use it...etc... Opinions are like *ssholes and everyone has one!

Regardless of what one thinks of Slackware the Linux distribution, the personal attacks against PV are totally uncalled for. Let's don't give this guy any more press than he's already received through the unfortunate decision of OSNews editors to prominently link to his article.

I think the fact that he can't get his mouse working in Slackware says it all. I say let those who want the distro to do everything for them chose Ubuntu or whatever they feel comfortable with. Slackware is not for everyone. Especially people that are uncomfprtable with the CLI and don't have enough Linux knowledge to manipulate a simple file like xorg.config.

So...he is too stupid to figure out how to properly configure the system, and therefore nobody else should use it?

I see.

For me, I prefer command-lines and scripts (and therefore Slackware's method of doing things) for several reasons, none of which include "understanding things better" - I understand the GUI as much as I do the CLI.

Control is the primary reason. Nothing lets you have control over what your computer does than a command line. Think about it. By the time you've gone into a GUI and it's booted all your programs, it's already run HUNDREDS of programs and settings, hit millions of lines of code, loaded all sorts of libraries and accessed all sorts of systems within the OS.

I want to be able to say to my computer: No. Don't do that. Don't load that. That hard disk is READ-ONLY. Don't touch that file. You don't need to load that program just to show me a mouse cursor.

I'm a professional - the GUI is just that - an interface - one of many possible interfaces. Some are MUCH better than others. I wouldn't want to have to edit a large image from the command-line. I wouldn't want to have to completely re-write my IP/DNS configuration from inside a GUI. I wouldn't want to have to remote-dial into a GUI-only system and I wouldn't want to perform lots of "trivial" file move operations from a command line (especially not with the folder structure that I generally use)... think about moving a random selection of files (say emails) into suitable directories (say, Read, Important, Spam etc.) - you can do it on the CLI, sure, but you can do it QUICKER in a GUI with subject-header preview, multiple windows, etc.

Similarly, it's much easier for me to update my Christmas list using the HTTP interface to some PHP scripts - it's simple, convenient and easy for everyone who needs to access it (and because it's MY Christmas list, I want EVERYONE to see it, even that dotty aunt who can only just type www!)

GUI's are totally impractical for remote-diagnosis of a problem within the "guts" of a system. A command-line is ten times simpler to log into and see what's wrong and fix it. The distro or even the OS has nothing to do with it.

Saying that the lack or otherwise of a GUI is reason enough not to use a particular distro tells you everything you need to know about this person. He's a Windows-Addict. If it doesn't have eight types of button, menu or widget he won't even look at it. He also never does anything "complicated", or if he does, he prefers to use the GUI way, EVERY TIME, even if that takes ten times longer.

Command-lines are THE BEST way to install an OS. Oh, how I miss the DOS-based installs of Windows - which I could recover from the worst atrocities by nothing more than a few tweaks of a BAT or INI file, or even just manual CLI registry backups which could be restored within even needing a bootdisk - Just bypass the AUTOEXEC, fix Windows and THEN boot the GUI.

CLI's don't need five dozen fully-working drivers just to get a desktop from which you can actually START working with the system (I can remember trying to install Windows 3 on Tseng and S3 cards which didn't have "standard" drivers included, pre-VESA standards).

When something goes wrong, even Windows resorts to a CLI, because it's the lowest level of access required to power the machine and fix any problems.

And then you have things that are utterly impossible in GUI's, or so complicated that it's not worth the effort. Locate, Grep and Sed will beat any Windows Find File function hands down, depending on the search you need to do. Why do you think that EVERY programming language is CLI-based, even if it comes with GUI-tools and a GUI-interface or even if you layout programs within it's GUI? Because it's the only way to get stuff done.

GUI's are nothing more than pretty shortcuts to do common tasks. Anyone who "needs" a GUI to install any OS is sadly lacking in computer skill and shouldn't be doing it - they should just go out and buy pre-installed stuff instead.

It's like shortcut keys vs menus. Sure, I like having menus in my word processor because I don't want to have to memorise seven hundred shortcuts. But also, Ctrl-C, Alt-Tab, Ctrl-V is a million times quicker than doing the equivalent with a mouse, no matter how fast you are at using the mouse, and works on Windows and X-Windows (at least KDE) alike. Equally, GUI drag-drop is a vast improvement over command-line methods in some cases.

Personally, I find Slackware's install process a major plus and was one reason why I chose Slackware. DOS was familiar to me at the time. Windows was nothing more than a few DOS shortcuts in pretty clothes. Even today, Slackware boots and installs on ANY computer, no matter how old, whether they've even got a display or not (wanna run a GUI over a serial cable? I think not!).

When something is even REMOTELY considering accessing the partition structure on my OS, I want to make absolutely sure that it's not defragging (or whatever) that same partition in the background and that a single mis-click won't result in wiping out Gb's of data. With a CLI, when it comes to partitioning, I can carefully type the entire line (with a safety # at the start just in case I hit enter accidentally), check it over several times and then execute when I'm ready. With a GUI, you get three options in a menu and you just click any one and it goes for it - Fine for when you're choosing your screensaver, not something I want to do when it's playing with the internals of a disk - a disk that it may even be running the GUI itself from!

If I'm doing a very complex command on a CLI several times over several disks, I can do it very carefully once and then just recall and change the partition name. You can't really do that from a GUI.

The CLI means that I'm in control. If I want to Ctrl-C in the middle of an install, I can. If I want it to pause after each package while I simultaneously clear up space via another virtual console, I can. If I want to set up a RAID to install on, whether or not the installer "could" do it for me, I can. GUI's only ever give you the options that their creators WANT you to have. Usually that means you end up with a canned config.

I don't WANT a canned config. It would be of no use to me at all. Every system I have is designed for a purpose and does it's job. A lot of the time that means that I want to control every aspect of the install, or that it can't even be DONE via GUI (serial installs, SSH installs etc.).

For the average Joe who wants Slackware to be Windows, of course they'll be disappointed. But for people who KNOW what they are doing, you can shove your GUI up your backside - I want to see what block size you've chosen, what you're installing onto, and change every tiny option that I like BEFORE you even start to install. The GUI's the last thing that I ever bother to get working on any system and at least 50% of the machines that I use don't even HAVE one.

Just another person that doesn't read the README or INSTALL file before doing it, he didn't install 2.6 modules which are needed to get mouse support with test26.s, big news...

I was initially angry with the vile article, particularly the name calling directed at Patrick. But, after reading the article I realized that the author is ignorant about Slackware.
Everyone has a right to their opinion.......even stupid people it seems. I'm surprised that osnews linked to that article.

I had read a couple of his previous Slackware reviews and just came to the conclusion that he just didn't quite get it. Looks like this is still the case.

I wasted 5 minutes of my life reading that crap.

What an idiot.
Apparently...

I think he does has some valid points.

Slackware is not perfect, and I don't believe that it is suitable for an everyday-use desktop or laptop system. It involves a lot of thinking to do relatively trivial tasks.

As for the installation, the Ncurses interface doesn't bother me. However, while it is not difficult to install the kernel modules after installation, why not automatically install them? If you select the huge26.s kernel, then why can't the installer install the relevant modules, or at least ask you "Do you want to install the kernel modules?" Also, why is only the 2.4 kernel source installed even if you select the huge26.s kernel?

Having said that, being command line based is a good thing. Command line always works, X11 can be tempermental. I think it would be nice if the package manager checked dependencies, like apt on Debian. Perhaps if slapt-get was an official part of Slackware, then we would have the best of both worlds.

I also think that the attacks on pat are uncalled for.

--Ian

Odd, I always though Slackware was by far the easiest distro to use. I always get utterly confused when it comes to all the user-friendly additions other distos include now-a-days.
I think he needs to read the General Info page about Slackware.

If it did I wouldn't use Slackware. I hate automated dependancy checking.

Slackware is what it is. If you don't like it, you don't have to use it.

TechieMoe??
 

What shits me is that both Newsforge and OS News linked to this FW like he had anything intelligent to say.

Personal Remarks = Immature FW = no credibility

Strange, I use Debian on my server and Slackware on my desktop and my laptop. I find it especially suitable for everyday use, and my girlfriend, who's only used to windows, has no problems using it every now and then without having to think a lot about it.