Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
Is Linux Not For You?

By rusty in News
Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 10:11:56 PM EST
Tags: Software (all tags)
Software

I was just browsing around today, and through some circuitous path involving Advogato and our very own Paul Dunne's homepage, I stumbled upon an essay by Joseph B. Ottinger titled Why Linux is Not For You. This was apparently first written in 1995 (?), by a full-time Linux user, and is, I thought, one of the fairest assessments that I've read of who Linux is not the best choice for, and why. Read it, before I dangle any more participles, then come back and discuss.


This raises some interesting questions. Quite a few linux users pretty much require that you use their OS before they'll even talk to you. Is this attitude and evangelism helping or hurting Linux in the long run? Or does it even make a difference? Why do you run Linux, or if not, why not? Please, please do not let this become an OS flamewar! I'd really like to hear what OS'es the readers here use, and refuse to use, and why. I think we may have a chance at actually making this a civil discussion, if we all count to three before posting. :-)

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Related Links
o Advogato
o Paul Dunne
o homepage
o Joseph B. Ottinger
o Why Linux is Not For You
o Also by rusty


Display: Sort:
Is Linux Not For You? | 26 comments (26 topical, editorial, 0 hidden)

I wish more people would pay att... (none / 0) (#1)
by bmetzler on Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 07:31:06 PM EST


bmetzler voted 1 on this story.

I wish more people would pay attention to this. It's really true. This advice is on the same level as 'don't take your car engine apart if you don't know what the purpose of the transmission is.' There's probably a reason why there are people who know those sorts of things. It's the same in the computer field. If you want to work with servers, then it helps if you know what makes them tic. If you don't, you probably belong somewhere else.

That essay was written a few years ago and things have changed drastically now, though. The first thing is that know Linux has those apps that only Windows had when the article was written. So now, instead of running FreeBSD (or Windows) you run Linux. Not because it's technically superior, but because it has the apps.

Why did Linux become popular? It's the Bazaar, that's why. I got started in Linux because I wanted to learn kernel development. With Linux anyone is free to work on the code and improve it. I really didn't have any use for Linux, but I wanted to learn. A lot of other people were in the same boot. They didn't need Linux to be productive, just were just interested in hacking. FreeBSD is different, in that although the code is free, you can't just expect to be able to submit patches, and get them in the kernel. So FreeBSD's market was manly to people who needed to use it, it relatively few in number, compared to the people how wanted to actually hack. However, that then resulted in a huge number of people wanting to use thier OS to be productive. Wammo! Major advocacy.

There's actually nothing wrong with how FreeBSD is managed. It's much better then Linux, I admit. But it doesn't attract hackers the way that Linux is able to. I have my FreeBSD box right over there in the corner, so I'm not biased or anything. :)

-Brent
www.bmetzler.org - it's not just a personal weblog, it's so much more.
First, this seems a little out of d... (none / 0) (#2)
by Nyarlathotep on Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 08:45:00 PM EST

Nyarlathotep voted -1 on this story.

First, this seems a little out of date, but second it makes the assumption that Windows is easy. I have seen some evidence that Windows is never the best choice for kids, i.e. kids can learn Windows or Linux equally effectivly and they learn more from Linux.
Campus Crusade for Cthulhu -- it found me!

Re: First, this seems a little out of d... (none / 0) (#7)
by rusty on Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 10:41:24 PM EST

It's true that a few of the points made are no longer true (most notably the "lack of software" argument), but the overall argument of the essay I think is still remarkably valid. Linuix, IMO, is still not cut out for those who just want to read email, look at a web site now and then, and use a word processor. It's like using a blowtorch to cook your hotdogs. Now, if you happen to have an admin around, an experienced linux user who can set up your box for you, and deal with problems if something goes wrong, then it makes a terriffic beginner's system. My girlfriend's machine is set up to just be a dumb X terminal to my main machine, and it's been up and running for 74 days (I just checked). I set her up with KDE, Star Office, and Netscape, and that's all she needs. She's been thrilled with it.

But if you don't have immediate help around, and something goes wrong, and you don't have any interest in learning anything, then Linux is probably not your best choice.

Note that the most important factor in the last sentence is "you don't have any interest in learning anything." You can get by with a windows machine without ever learning a single blessed thing, because that world is set up to make that easy. Linux is still geared for the experimenter, and the knowlege seeker, I think. And that's the important gist of the essay.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Re: First, this seems a little out of d... (none / 0) (#10)
by bmetzler on Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 11:09:18 PM EST

I just disagree with 2 of your points...

Linuix, IMO, is still not cut out for those who just want to read email, look at a web site now and then, and use a word processor.

Actually, it just perfect. No, consumers aren't going to be using it they way it is now. Comsumers really aren't interested in learning how to use a "computer". If they want e-mail, web, and word-processing, they'll want a black box that they can just turn on, and there's the three buttons. More of a console type thing. Embedded Linux is perfect for this. So is BeOS. Consumers not only don't care what OS is running their web browser, they *don't* want to know. Think of the millions of households with no PC now. That's the new market for mass computing.

You can get by with a windows machine without ever learning a single blessed thing, because that world is set up to make that easy.

Not really. You need to learn Windows if you are going to want to use it, just like you'd have to learn KDE to use it. The only reason Windows seems easy is because usually the victim in question has *already* taken the effort to learn it. It's like learning to read a bike. Riding a bike is a breeze. However, you forget that it took a while to learn how to ride it in the first place. You just think about the rewards now.

Let me put it in perspective for you. I work at a large corporation upgrading PC's from Windows 3.1 to NT 4.0. The upgrade was easy, take out the old PC, plug in the new PC. Then the user sat down and went back to work. No problem, right? Wrong! After a few days, we realized that there was a major problem. None of the hundreds of users that we were upgrading new how to use NT, because it wasn't Windows 3.1. So we stopped upgrading until they all had a chance to go through classes to learn NT.

Well, there the story happily ends. They figured out how to use NT, after much training, and went back to work. But think about it for a while. I bet at that point, we could have taught KDE to the users, they would have learned it, sat done back at their desks and been just as comfortable. So it's not that Windows is any easier. Just that that's what they've been taught.

-Brent
www.bmetzler.org - it's not just a personal weblog, it's so much more.
[ Parent ]
Windows user friendlyness is an illusion (none / 0) (#11)
by Nyarlathotep on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 01:29:08 AM EST

I have heard a simmilar story from anyone who uses Linux and has kids who use Linux. They all say the kids learn Linux just as fast as they learn Windows.

I think it would do the Linux community a lot of good for some people to do some real research into the kids and Linux thing. We would have the school in our pocket if we could say "look kids learn Linux as quickly as they learn Windows and they can do more with it so they are more prepaired." Schools in countries where you understanding of a computer makes the diffrence between staying poor and moving to Silicon Valley would just all over this.

Campus Crusade for Cthulhu -- it found me!
[ Parent ]
Re: Windows user friendlyness is an illusion (none / 0) (#12)
by rusty on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 02:01:31 AM EST

I wasn't actually trying to imply that windows is "user friendly." I've heard that argument before too, and it's not true. The difference is windows hides it's complexity from you, at all times. If something isn't working, reboot it. That's really the only fix (for the desktop user). That doesn't really work in linux, I've found. You actually have to fix problems :-)

Maybe I'm biased by the fact that the idea of millions of "power users" asking me how to insert kernel modules gives me the heebie jeebies. I should've learned my lesson a long time ago, that I'm just not qualified to address this issue, by virtue of disliking being asked dumb computer questions a lot. I forsee a future where those of us who've been using linux since now are the ones everyone will ask "how do I..."

It's funny. Despite being the "computer guy" amongst a lot of my friends, no one ever asks me questions like that, because when it's about windows, I just give them a blank look and say "I don't know, I don't ever use it." :-)

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Re: Windows user friendlyness is an illusion (none / 0) (#24)
by Paul Dunne on Sat Feb 26, 2000 at 05:09:56 AM EST

"You have to fix problems." Exactly. Some people actually like doing this, others can if they must, and still others are not interested. This last group use Windows because it's "easiest", in the sense that they don't have to get involved.

On Windows' user-friendliness, well, yes, it is user-friendly, for a certain type of user. If you don't want to page through the manual, or examine the on-line help, your average Windows app. is easier to figure out than some cryptic command-line program. Sure, the latter is likely to be more powerful, more flexible, and easier to use once you've learned it; but, for better or worse, that's not what most people mean when they say "user-friendly": they mean the Windows style: "hmm, click on this; oh it does that; right, click here; ah there it is..." etc etc.
http://dunne.home.dhs.org/
[ Parent ]

Re: Windows user friendlyness is an illusion (none / 0) (#25)
by rusty on Sat Feb 26, 2000 at 05:25:50 AM EST

Sure, the latter is likely to be more powerful, more flexible, and easier to use once you've learned it; but, for better or worse, that's not what most people mean when they say "user-friendly":

It just occurred to me tonight that I haven't used XmySQL for months. That's a mySQL front-end for X, approximately point-and-click, and it was a huge help to me when I didn't know SQL by heart, to have the syntax right there in front of me, so I could just click and assemble statements. This is the windows way of doing things.

I now mumble SQL in my sleep (....select * from rem-sleep where programmer = "exhausted"...), and using the gui interface just slows me down. Now I use the CLI mysql client that comes with the system. It does table and row tab-completion, command history, etc etc. Basically, for my needs now, it's much more powerful.

I'm personally fond of the "unix way" of putting graphical frontends on CLI programs, as optional add-ons. I think that's optimal for any program that could be either. It's all about choice.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Too much Pro- Linux stuff posted- a... (none / 0) (#3)
by Strange Charmed One on Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 09:09:43 PM EST

Strange Charmed One voted 1 on this story.

Too much Pro- Linux stuff posted- any balance that is not FUD is useful.
--
Feel the urge to put excessively cute little quotes into your .sig?

JUST SAY NO!

If you or one of your friends is frequently plagued by this tendency, Help IS available- Ask me how.

I like Linux. I've had a shell acco... (none / 0) (#5)
by Perpetual Newbie on Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 09:40:38 PM EST

Perpetual Newbie voted 1 on this story.

I like Linux. I've had a shell account on a friend's machine for a couple years now. I've installed it on two of my machines. I can't, for the life of me, figure out how to get mice, soundcards, LAN cards, or X to work, even after reading several books and howtos and spending time on IRC with the #linux guys saying "Uhh... it should be working now. You're not bullshitting us?". Both times, I ended up with a semi-functional system until the hardware died a few months later.

Sometimes it does seem like Linux is not for me. I'm currently putting up with Windows, and it seems to be enough for day-to-day use after I hack the crap out of it and beat it into submission.

Oh well. I might give Linux another shot, but not in the near future, at least until I can get hardware that isn't all no-name El Cheapo parts from companies that don't have a net presence. Anyone know if there's a good set of docs on how to do things from just the command line? Most people tell me "Just use the automagic X configurator thingie. What do you mean you don't have X working yet? Uh.. I don't know how to do that then". Even some of the howtos I've seen are like this.

Re: I like Linux. I've had a shell acco... (none / 0) (#6)
by rusty on Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 10:33:49 PM EST

Have you tried finding any local LUG's in your area, or attending an installfest? You seem to be interested, but have a hard time with the first steep learning-curve climb (which, I can remember, can be tough for a windows user). Sometimes just being around people and watching them do stuff can flip the switch, and make the light dawn ("So THAT'S what that was!"). There's definitely something to be said for "being there" especially for computer support.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]
Re: I like Linux. I've had a shell acco... (none / 0) (#9)
by joeyo on Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 11:01:17 PM EST

I've had some rough times with linux as well (I had a weird video card and a freakin' win-modem) but generally the newer distros make things much more easy. I heard somewhere that everyone should make their first install with someone else helping them and I think this helps a lot. I had two experienced linux users on-hand when I went thru my first install (Redhat 5.1) even though I had unix and other sundry OS experience too. There are a lot of little things which are pretty straight forward once you know what you are doing but not at all obvious.

And always remember, man pages are your friends... :)

--
"Give me enough variables to work with, and I can probably do away with the notion of human free will." -- demi
[ Parent ]

Re: I like Linux. I've had a shell acco... (none / 0) (#14)
by Anonymous Hero on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 09:29:05 AM EST

I love linux as much as the average computer guy but I too realize that it takes some time and effort to learn and install linux. I know when I first worked with it I did it around other people and we figured it out together. Windows has its ups and downs but I have to admit that last week I setup my parents first computer and although I thought of using linux I reallized that they would want to use the computer for all of those uses we don't. For instance I am sure my mom will want to use it for those card making programs, and setting up her nest landscaping plans. If it weren't for that I would have started them out on a cleanly setup linux box. Oh well instead I am just going to have to put up with long distance calls trying to explain the latest blue screen or gpf. "Ok mom you are going to need to reboot it." Where is that button? "OH GREAT!

[ Parent ]
Re: I like Linux. I've had a shell acco... (none / 0) (#21)
by Anonymous Hero on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 06:31:08 PM EST

joeyo said:

I heard somewhere that everyone should make their first install with someone else helping them and I think this helps a lot.


Yeah, I've been thinking of getting someone to come over and help me out next time I try. I know a guy in the next county over that I can probably bribe with jolt and pizza, and he knows his stuff.

Perpetual Newbie, too lazy to log in

[ Parent ]
More fair, reasoned and objective a... (none / 0) (#4)
by Demona on Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 10:11:56 PM EST

Demona voted 1 on this story.

More fair, reasoned and objective articles and less bigotry! Can't we all just get along? Of course, the true zealot will always be convinced of the righteousness of their cause.

Re: Is Linux Not For You? (none / 0) (#8)
by bmetzler on Thu Feb 24, 2000 at 10:54:43 PM EST

For what it's worth, I believe that there's a advantage to every OS. Just like there are many types of automobiles, and the way you intend on using it will determine whether you get a sub-compact, pick-up, SUV, or mini-van, so will how you use your computer determine what OS you'll run. I've seen way to many people push an idea that soon everything will run on Linux. Linux will destroy all competition and nothing could possibly compete with it. Well, I must say, I hadn't heard that since I left the Microsoft field, and I thought I had heard of the end of it then. Let me set the record straight right here. There will be a ton of things that Linux will never do better then other OS's. And there will be a ton of things that other OS's will never do better then Linux.

It's like a big puzzle. Only one piece will fit where you want. But it's a different piece everytime. And only one OS will not fit everywhere either. In the best setup, a network may have a dozen different OS's to do all the different functions. This is how it should be. But to say that one OS can do everything best, whether it's Windows 2000 or Linux, is just plain wrong.

I generally point newbies to Mac's because they are most userfriendly. For someone who wants to do graphical and multimedia work, I'll nudge them to BeOS. If someone wants to play games, I'll point out the Playstation. If they want to hack, and learn who to use a Unix-like OS, I'll give them a copy of Linux. So I have no problem with any OS. Oh, except I failed to mention an OS by one vendor. While I can't accept the idea that Windows is the best for everything, I do believe that are the areas that it does excel in. And in those specific areas I would advocate the use of Windows, except for one thing. I can't support a company that indulges in unethical activities.

I know a lot of people believe that Microsoft would have been better then the competition, even if they hadn't broken the law with regard to DR-DOS, Intel, Apple, Netscape, and OEM's. And I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. Even if Netscape wasn't crunched, IE would have probably been better. (And we wouldn't have gotten Mozilla, which is the best :) However, it'd be like someone competing in the 500 meter run in the Olympics. If they are 2 as fast as all the other runners, they won't lose. But if they are twice as fast, and yet take drugs to improve their strength so the *know* they won't lose, then they'll be disqualified. It's no excuse that they were faster then everyone else to begin with. They participate with the rules, or not at all. And it's the same with Microsoft. They may have been better anyways, but they were paranoid enough to break the law to make sure they won. So they were from an easy win, to a disqualification, or, in this case, an anti-trust lawsuit.

I'm just waiting for Microsoft be enact ethical business practices again. Then I'll support them too.

-Brent
www.bmetzler.org - it's not just a personal weblog, it's so much more.
Re: Is Linux Not For You? (none / 0) (#13)
by rusty on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 02:16:50 AM EST

While I can't accept the idea that Windows is the best for everything, I do believe that are the areas that it does excel in.

I'll say it. Windows NT is good for file serving, office LAN type environments, where ease of configuration is more important than stability. It's a good competitor to Novell. I am glad I don't have to use it though. :-)

I agree that OS'es serve different niches. I wonder if there are any niches that Windows NT is simply better at than Linux, and that linux isn't likely to catch up to any time soon. I ask specifically about Windows vs. Linux because right now, they're muscling for the same space. Solaris and Irix, for example, will likely remain as "kings of the big iron" for some time. MacOS has been and I guess will continue to be the choice of the hip, just get it done crowd. Although it'll be interesting to see how OSX does, if it catches on amongst those who are not "the faithful." But the Win vs. Lin thing is interesting to alot of folks, I think, because of the overlap in niche.

And marketing is not a niche. Sorry, I couldn't help it.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

he's right, in part (none / 0) (#15)
by xah on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 10:17:38 AM EST

That article seems more up to date than the "1995" to the bottom of the page. Can it be 5 years since ESR wrote "The Cathedral and the Bizarre?" I feel old.

Hi, my name is xah and I use Windows. I hate my OS. I hate MS. But I can't switch away from this devilish OS. I've installed Linux before (.99, Debian, and RH 5.1). I've even got X, mice, network cards, and sound to work (thank you, RH). But as the article points out, the question is apps.

I'm not going to switch over completely until I take all my apps with me. That includes Quicken 98, InfoSelect (see MicroLogic), Visio, and PMMail (see this slow link). Visio may be equaled in Linux, but not the rest.

Linux is particularly weak in MUA's (Mail User Agents). I'm not talking sendmail or fetchmail. I'm talking about something like pine or TkRat. Frankly, none of the Linux MUA's compare to the MUA's for Windows, Mac, or even OS/2. As much as I despise e-mail these days, it's important to my life.

The Linux word processor saga is well known. Now that WordPerfect is available, Linux is comparable to MS in this category.

For some Internet apps, though, Linux is behind the curve. Quicktime? Flash? Shockwave? Winamp? Yes, I know about XMMS, but that doesn't have the cool plug-ins like G-force and Whitecap? While these are just toys, if you've never tried them, you would be impressed. After being a char mode only user for many years, I certainly have been. At least RealNetworks is porting their apps to Linux again.

Wine? If Wine can run all my non-ported apps without errors, then I'd be surprised. Even OS/2's DOS/Win emulation had major problems.

If there are solutions to my problems, send me e-mail. Thanks.

Re: he's right, in part (none / 0) (#16)
by bmetzler on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 11:19:54 AM EST

Linux is particularly weak in MUA's (Mail User Agents). I'm not talking sendmail or fetchmail. I'm talking about something like pine or TkRat. Frankly, none of the Linux MUA's compare to the MUA's for Windows, Mac, or even OS/2. As much as I despise e-mail these days, it's important to my life.

You are right about that. But unfortunately, so is Windows :( I have a multitude of pop3 and imap accounts that I need to use. Outlook Express handles the imap accounts fine enough, but dumps the pop3 accounts all in the local inbox. That's a mess unless I create a zillion mail rules. Outlook 97 seems to crash if I have more then one 'internet email' account. I've got to check that out somemore. Netscape 4 supports multiple imap accounts, but not multiple pop3 accounts. So maybe I've got to check out other email clients for Windows. Same problems under Linux too. For a long time, when I only had 1 e-mail account I was using Pine. Now for one of my accounts I use mutt. Maybe those support pop3, I don't know but it'd be nice.

The solution though is Mozilla. The mozilla e-mail client supports multiple imap and pop3 accounts just the way I want. So I was glad to see that, and can't wait for it to be finished so that I can start using it. I also hope that they add the remote profile functionality like they had in 4.5. Then I can have my e-mail from anywhere. hehe.

-Brent
www.bmetzler.org - it's not just a personal weblog, it's so much more.
[ Parent ]
Re: he's right, in part (none / 0) (#19)
by xah on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 02:10:39 PM EST

>I have a multitude of pop3 and imap accounts >that I need to use. Outlook Express handles the >imap accounts fine enough, but dumps the pop3 >accounts all in the local inbox.

Yep. PMMail is an (unfortunately) obscure MUA that handles this the right way. For example, I currently have 3 POP3 accounts (formerly 7). I open 1 app and mail is downloaded periodically to each separate inbox. If you use Windows go to blueprintsoftwareworks.com. Unfotunately their web site is offline a lot.

Don't know anything about Mozilla's mail client. I don't trust any Netscape app except the browser, and that one just barely. I don't like "swiss army tool" apps.

Take care.

[ Parent ]
Re: he's right, in part (none / 0) (#18)
by rusty on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 12:35:46 PM EST

Quicktime? Flash? Shockwave?

I believe that the sorensen codec (used in the new QT) is under sever licensing restrictions, and no one can get a license to make an up-to-date QT player.

As for Flash/Shockwave, we have that now. I know, no one told me either. But now you get a "download the plugin" button when you go to flash sites, and the linux flash plugin is available and works great.

____
Not the real rusty
[ Parent ]

Re: he's right, in part (none / 0) (#22)
by Paul Dunne on Sat Feb 26, 2000 at 04:57:54 AM EST

First, a question. Why do you hate windows? It seems to do what you want.

If you compare Linux to Windows using a Windows frame of reference, naturally Windows will come out ahead every time. The thing is, Linux/Unix gives you a different, to my mind superior, way of doing things. So, of course the "Windows-like" apps for Linux aren't as good as the native ones: we do things differently.

You use MUA as one example. Now, if there's one sort of application Linux is not short of, it's MUAs. There are dozens of them. I use a combination of MH and procmail, which I'll bet you any money is more capable than any Windows equivalent. BUT it does its work in a Unix way, not a Windows way.

Oh, and saying, "Linux doesn't have shockwave" is rather like saying, "Linux doesn't break my legs when I log on". Why would you want it to do that?
http://dunne.home.dhs.org/
[ Parent ]

Dont' confuse me with the facts... (none / 0) (#17)
by Emacs on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 11:24:44 AM EST

1) Okay I'll say it - I love Linux. It sounds strange I know...in fact it feels strange to tyoe it... to profess my love for an operating system.. but hey... I'm not your average bear.

2) I really don't give a hoot if anyone else uses Linux. I really don't. I don't care if you use Windows, Mac, Be, OS/2, Amiga...etc... I really don't care. If you ask me I'll tell you why I use Linx, but I won't suggest that you use it. You can use whatever you want and whatever works for you.

3) I'm old. Yep...well okay.. maybe not *real* old, but I'm old enough to remember when C was this new up and coming programming language. (Pascal was the shit back then). I'm old enough to remember using ...*gulp* punch cards.. *cold sweat* I started programming on a VAX/VMS and loved every second of it. I loved every arcane command. It was a feeling of power.

4) I graduated from school and went on with my life. Then in 1997 - Enter Linux. I had never heard of it(not that I can remember) but I was very interested. I still remember my first install. IT wasn't easy. My poor old compaq 486 had some crap hardware and Linux wasn't able to find my CDROM. After finally getting the drive partitioned I did the hard drive install... and presto magico ... I was looking at a login prompt. I was instatnly sold. I logged in and started putzing around, trying to figure out the shell commands. It was just like that time in the 8th grade when I saw that pretty curvy blond girl walking down the hall. It was love and I was gone.

5) For me Linux is everything that Macs, Windows isn't. It's like the VAX/VMS.. I get that feeling of power... control. I feel like it's my ship and I'm the captain.

6) Thats my story.

Re: Is Linux Not For You? (none / 0) (#20)
by driph on Fri Feb 25, 2000 at 04:14:58 PM EST

You guys think the OS wars now are bad, ya shoulda been around back in the Atari vs Commodore days..:]

I've always been a promiscuous computer user.. currently, my primary machine happens to be a Macintosh(the one guilty for the '=? in my last story..) It's a Mac because it does the things I need to do best. I know the OS and the hardware in and out.. And it's surprisingly moldable. With Applescript and res-edit one can do some interesting things.

However, one thing is missing from the Macintosh.

It's the feeling of base exploration..getting down to the core of what makes everything tick.

I remember a book I had when I was young called Mapping the Atari. It told you where everything was, and what it did. We built joysticks from scratch, screwed around with connections... hijacked our parents phone lines during the night and ran BBS's off of 2 floppy drives, a primative version of the weblog.. user login, message boards... not much else..

That is what Linux is doing to the kids growing up with computers today. Yes, you can dig deep into Window or the Mac OS.. but you dont HAVE to. Everything is there for you, ready to go.
With Linux, they get to taste the heart of the machine.. tinker..experiment.. scrap together parts, boot up a machine, and run a site like kuro5hin or slashdot.

Although I'd used Linux in the past when doing basic job related admin work, I had never installed the OS, ran through setup, etc.
The other day I downloaded the Caldera eServer image, wiped a Win2k beta off my AMD box, and installed it.. I love it! Sure, there have been hassles even at this point, but things are working. I can see the basic Apache page, move around in the system, browse the web.. I can see why the fanaticism has developed..
(man, I am tired, so excuse any errors..:]..)




--
Vegas isn't a liberal stronghold. It's the place where the rich and powerful gamble away their company's pension fund and strangle call girls in their hotel rooms. - Psycho Dave
Re: Is Linux Not For You? (none / 0) (#23)
by Paul Dunne on Sat Feb 26, 2000 at 05:00:44 AM EST

You sound like a natural candiate for a NextCube. Ever play with one of those? They seemed like the best of both worlds (never used one, alas).
http://dunne.home.dhs.org/
[ Parent ]
Re: Is Linux Not For You? (none / 0) (#26)
by driph on Sat Feb 26, 2000 at 03:46:41 PM EST

I never used a Cube, but I did use the, er, polyhedron box they came out with..an 030 or 040 was in it, right? I borrowed the box for about 2 weeks or so from a client..



--
Vegas isn't a liberal stronghold. It's the place where the rich and powerful gamble away their company's pension fund and strangle call girls in their hotel rooms. - Psycho Dave
[ Parent ]
Is Linux Not For You? | 26 comments (26 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!