I have started this threat in hope to gain some feedback about the reviews of so called "Linux Experts".

The reason why I want to start this threat is based on this Forum article:

http://www.linuxquestions.org/questi...w-12.1-646255/

I have read many reviews on Linux ( mostly Slackware ) and got very confused. The authors of those reviews claim to be Linux experts and this should indicate that one can trust to read a nice objective review by people who are professionals.
But this is almost nether really the case about Slackware or other "more difficult" distros.

They call themselves experts because they have been using Linux distros for years and are running them as main desktop. But still, I think this must be a joke.

How come those experts have no clue what to do when the system does boot to CLI instead of the loging GUI ?

How come those experts are spending hours to figure out how to use the HAL system with Slackware ?

How come that many review authors (aka "Linux experts") have no idea how to work with the console or how to configure a system by editing text files ?

How come those experts only know "point & click" ?

The list would go here for hours.

I get the strong impression that most of those experts have only limited knowledge about Linux under the hood.

What is your experience with these "Linux experts" ? Is it all just a joke or are people loosing the grip on Linux?

Not sure what the point of this thread is....are you suggesting that Slack is only for experts? I'm certainly NOT an expert, and Slackware is the main system on my Laptop (the one that I boot into most often.) Reviews like the one you cite are mainly meant for people investigating a new distro, newbies and experts alike. What's wrong with that? An expert might install and set-up Slack in a short time, while for a newbie it might take hours (or days) to set up the same system, but they both end up with the same great, stable system. My point is that if I were to be asked to write a review of Slackware, it would look very much like the ones you cite, written by a non-expert but very much recommending the distro.

Bob

Nope. The authors of those reviews claim to be members of LQ. Nothing more and nothing less. They are mostly very experienced Linux users and, as such, are qualified to create a review of an OS that they use. Any review is simply a subjective opinion.

Many users are stumped by Slackware. That's what we're here for. If everyone was an expert, there would be no need for help forums.

I have just been introduced to Slackware, my only other experience of Linux weas a brief enounter with Suse.
I wanted a reliable system, having used windows for years i am totally fed up with a system that is so unstable and poorly built, yes it is user friendly to a point but that does not get over its limitations in other ways.

I decided on Slackware as it is so nicely laid out and by all accounts is very stable.

It will be a big learning curve for me, especially as i am getting close to retirement age, but i thought it was best to just jump in the deep end and either sink or swim.
I am really going to enjoy learning how it all works, i love a challenge and it is not going to beat me.

I have only been on this forum for a couple of days but already the noobie questions i have asked have been answered almost straight away by the many good folk here.

It really is a pleasure to find such super help and advice and my thanks to all.

Ian J

I agree that these "experts" are not really experts, but that's not the worst part. They not only claim to be experts, but they don't even attempt to RTFM or to even search google for answers, which often would lead them right here where there's a sticky on how to make HAL work, and Shilo's guide, and not to mention that the Slackbook is included on the CD, no they don't bother looking at that, heck they don't even bother reading what's on the screen, it tells you what to do throughout the entire install process.

This also suggests that most distros won't teach you anything, they'll only fool you into thinking you're an expert cuz you've used so many.

And no, I'm not an expert, but I'm getting there a lot faster than with most other distros.

Yeah, well.... Ain't it true that Slackware isn't for everyone?

Slack is pretty uncompromising in it's vision of how a system should behave. One might even say that it's an acquired taste. But rest assured, as long as there are slackers, there will be slackbashers. It's a side effect of not having tried to please absolutely everybody.

Usually I just refer to the Slackware site and ask them where they got the idea that slack is some sort of friendly mainstream distro. No pictures of happy people there, no impressive screenshots, it's not even got colors that site. It does however give lots of information in an orderly fashion. I don't know about you guys, but if I want to know something I think the slacksite works far better than wading through all those flash animations that scream "use me!|$newversion = better than $oldversion|Download now!|Sign up for a FREE MEMBERSHIP|Win a t-shirt|Look at our gallery|See how YOU can benefit from US" ad nauseum.

Ah well, maybe it's just me... I've been spending the better part of this rainy day installing and tweaking Slackware 12.1 on my main machine. Now I'm not an expert either. But once you get the hang of it, it's amazing what you can get slack to do.

Hi,
Welcome to Slackware!

You've chose a great distribution to do what you want with. As for the retirement bit, You are never to old to unlearn something.

Take a gander at 'Slackware-Links'. More than just Slackware® links!

Hi,

True to a certain extent. You can get most people to get a good install of Slackware on their system with a little patience for all.

You can do just about anything you want with 'YOUR' install. The documentation is there and with the LQ Slackware along with the 'Slackware-Links'. More than just Slackware® links! Your destiny is a complete dream machine. And if you look from Darwin's point then the upper chain of life.

Subject matter experts are more knowledgeable than most people about a particular subject but that is all. They are not all-knowing. No human is. All humans are creatures of limited knowledge. To believe any subject matter expert is all-knowing is a fallacy and illusion and a misunderstanding of human nature and abilities.

I've been involved in the technical writing field for two decades. In that period I've conversed with and interviewed many subject matter experts. I've learned that a subject matter expert is more knowledgeable than most people about a particular subject but remains ignorant about many aspects too. I've lost count how many times I've asked a question and the subject matter expert answered, "I don't know."

Conversely, I have learned that subject matter experts usually are skilled at finding new information within their particular expertise and usually are experienced at thinking and reasoning their way through issues they have not yet encountered within that area of expertise.

Slackers tend to fit those same observations. Many Slackers will not confess to being a subject matter expert but most are skilled and experienced at finding answers and solutions. Most Slackers are not afraid to roll up their sleeves and get their hands dirty.

With respect to the link you provided, which is derived from Caitlyn Martin's review of Slackware 12.1, Slackware is not for everybody. I never have been fully content with Slackware but the primary drawing card is that Slackware seldom gets in my way. I can customize Slackware to my tastes. At times that is frustrating because I'm no different than other humans in that sometimes I want the easy way out and to point-and-click my way to my desired result. Yet the more I depend upon another developer to make decisions for me, the more controlled I become. In that respect, Slackware is accompanied with a steep learning curve. Most computer users today want to use computers like a car. That is fine, but they can't complain much with the design decisions. As Caitlyn wrote in the forum discussion, she wants to drive a car, not build a car.

Slackware provides a basic operating system and many tools to expand upon that foundation. Many tools are not provided (OpenOffice often is cited as an example). That was a primary point of Caitlyn's review. I agree with her in that respect. Does this lack of specific tools render Slackers as fake experts? Hardly. Because Slackware is a base operating system that the end-user builds to taste, and because computers are incredibly complex tools, possibly the most complex tools humans have invented, there are always going to be several different ways to solve problems. Ask 10 people for help and be prepared for 11 answers. That does not create an argument that Slackers are not knowledgeable but argues the opposite.

Even when I have non Slackware specific questions, I usually still post in the Slackware forum. Why? Sure, there is a sense of community and belonging as I am a Slacker too. However, Slackers like to dig into their computers and that attitude means I usually will receive responses that will help me resolve my immediate computer problems. Most of the time Slackers provide responses that help rather than providing generic guesses.

After two decades of working with subject matter experts, I'd say most Slackers qualify for that label. They don't know everything, they don't pretend to know everything, but they know how to find answers and solutions, at least better than many people using computers.

[Steps down from soap box.]

Originally Posted by /dev/me:
“ Yeah, well.... Ain't it true that Slackware isn't for everyone? “

I think it is for everyone. I'm pretty much at the bottom of the linux food chain. I have no computer background, and it wasn't long ago that I thought “Linux” was some sort of “cat” in South America.

My first Linux distro was something that I bought from Newegg out of curiosity.

I wasted a lot of time with some of the other “simpler” distros that had nice gui's that would do most of what the average home/small biz user needs to do, and learned nothing. When something broke and I couldn't figure out how to fix it with the gui's point and click environment, I was screwed. -->hose&reload time.

My first encounter with Slack was maybe a year ago when Slack 12 came out. There was nothing complicated about the install. I didn't even read any documentation on it. I selected the “full install” and it installed faster that any other distro that I've tried. After I got past the “/etc/inittab 4” thing I had a perfect “basic” system that would do Internet, email, office documents, & several other things rather well.

This forum pointed me to things like src2pkg, SlackBuilds, & most importantly “The Slack Book”.
Now I'm not limited to what a gui will let me do. I'm only limited to what I learn to do.

I've manually installed the nvidia driver on several other distros and can say that slack is the easiest for me, and it always boots correctly afterwards.

Slack is easier for me to fix when I screw something up.

More importantly, Slack doesn't have some stupid updater popping up from the tool bar saying “DO YA FEEL LUCKY?'.

Yeah, I think Slack “is” for everyone. At least it should be tried first by the newcomer before becoming dependent on a gui.

As for me, I'm actually enjoying the learning curve.

Woodsman, it is always a tremendous pleasure reading your posts. They are well-written, thoughtful, polite and intelligent. The same goes for your excellent website.

On the subject matter, I'd say it's a bit like game reviews. If an FPS game is being reviewed by a die hard RTS gamer, who've never done any kind of FPS gaming, then the review will probably "suck". He/she will have little to no understanding of the multiplayer aspects, the balancing of weapons, the level layout and other FPS related issues. Sure, he/she might give the game a good score based on having had a certain amount of fun, or being impressed with sound/graphics, but it's still an empty shell of a review, because the reviewer is inexperienced on the subject he/she is writing about.

I think the same goes for distro reviews.

The really good distro reviews are written by people who A. understand what it is they are reviewing, and B. treat the distro in accordance with the philosophy behind the distro.

That's not the same as saying that a reviewer brought up on Ubuntu/Opensuse can't do a good Slackware review, but he/she will probably fail to understand all the little intricacies of Slackware and instead focus on why on earth it doesn't behave like Ubuntu.

And the same goes for a die hard CLI junkie. He will probably write a very poor review of Ubuntu.

There are of course exceptions out there. There are people out there who can write equally good reviews of both Ubuntu, Slackware, BSD and what else the world might throw at us. They are rare, but they do exist.

/Thomas

slackass :
Laughed out loud at that - classic..

That pretty much nailed it. A lot of people see what Ubuntu has done to lower the learning curve for newbies and think that there can't be anyone who would want a distro that does not follow the same philosophy. Then they pick up Slackware and think the reason it is the way it is is because the maintainer is living in the past, or it's a one man show, or whatever.

An unfortunate side-effect of Ubuntu's success is the increasing belief that "Linux = Ubuntu". Even if an Ubuntu user does come over to try Slackware, they don't always try to learn the Slackware way of doing things. Instead, they try to use other packagemanagement sytems or install rpm's and complain when things don't work. I wouldn't try to use pkgtool in Debian or Suse. I don't get it.

The last point I think needs to be made is that there are a lot of blogs and web sites that are short on original content. There are too many sites that reprint or link to bad journalism just to have something to go on their web page with all the advertising banners. This just increases the visability of crap that never should have been written in the first place. People see these stories everywhere so it becomes the truth. The web is killing quality journalism.

I don't think there is such a thing as an objective review of anything. They're all tainted by personal preference and preconceived ideas. Try things for yourself, make your own mind up, and if you read a negative review of whatever it is you like - just ignore it, regard it as a waste of cyberspace.

Saying there is no such thing as an objective view is just playing with semantics.

Of course reviews and opinions have to be taken in context - and that is especially true of software in general and Linux in particular.

It can be said that this or that software meets this or that requirement with varying degrees of success.

Slackware meets the requirements of many computer users and could do so for many others. There will always be those for which it is not suitable. But for the ones whose purpose it does meet, then Slackware does it well. Thats my review.

Also there is nothing wrong with 'experts' saying they don't know in answer to some questions. In fact it is quite refreshing and gives credibility to the expert, in my opinion. That statement is said in the context of what I want from an expert; which is the truth as far as they know it. I understand they may be wrong, but they are telling the truth as they believe it to be. I then have to estimate how expert they are.