The article misses something
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| slippery Jul 25, 2005 11:19 AM EDT |
I understand his distaste for bad manners, but there are valid points he is missing. If the only values you have are utilitarian, then yes, every OS is just a tool. But, there is a philosophy of putting the user in control of her own computer, and of sharing, that distinguishes an open source OS from Windows, OSX, etc. If the convicted, illegal behavior of certain corporations does not bother you, then so be it. It does bother me and that is why simple utility is not the only thing I consider when choosing my OS. Nazism, Fascism, Communism, and Democracy are all just tools of government, right? They all work to some degree and mostly accomplish the same things. Why bicker over the differences? |
| phubert Jul 25, 2005 11:32 AM EDT |
Well, I'll have to admit I was focused on civility in forums when reading the article. And, on that topic alone, the author would be safe. I must agree with the posters here that F/LOSS v. proprietary is far more significant than whose wrench I use to assemble parts. |
| jimf Jul 25, 2005 12:10 PM EDT |
Well slippery, much as I despise MS business practices, I am able to separate that from the actual product. While I personally think that the tool has more than a few flaws, there are valid reasons to use Windows... if nothing more than some proprietary apps are just not available in one platform or another. If you want to condemn people that use proprietary software and call them Nazis and Fascists for their choice, you are simply using inflammatory rhetoric to make a non-valid point. In no way are these terms appropriate. And again, you are certainly doing nothing to win the confidence or conversion of the opposition. It is a another sad commentary of our times that people want to make all sorts of inappropriate things political. I've even heard some very good arguments for Debian being Communist, but In the end, an OS or any other tool needs to be judged on its real merits and not on some imagined political association or conspiracy. Let's leave MS to the courts and try to convert users with reason and at least a minimal courtesy. |
| slippery Jul 25, 2005 2:20 PM EDT |
Jimf, nowhere in my comment did I "condemn people that use proprietary software and call them Nazis and Fascists for their choice". Please read my comment again. I was trying to make a point that there is more to consider in the choice than utility. I chose those words to make my point but I did not condemn or call anyone names. |
| jimf Jul 25, 2005 5:11 PM EDT |
Sorry slippery, I misunderstood what you were saying. |
| Libervis Jul 25, 2005 5:38 PM EDT |
Everyone should follow some basic netiquette/etiquette manners no matter what. That is true. What is not true (and seems to be one of the points of this article) is that in GNU/Linux case OS is just a tool and should be looked at as just a tool. It is not, GNU/Linux is a tool produced with the goal of giving people freedom and thus as a GNU/Linux user you have this freedom, while with Windows or MacOSX you don't. This is even more important then the mere technical merit of the software and is also the most important and valid point to advocating GNU/Linux as superior to other unfree operating systems. There is even more to it. Freedom ultimately does produce a better technology, and by that premise, GNU/Linux is in certain fields also a technically superior operating system. The free development model makes sure it is, that's natural to it. So, the "windows and MacOSX vs GNU/Linux" battle certainly does make alot of sense. We only have to know how to fight it, and I agree that offending people is not the way. We should be smart, generally friendly and clear when advocating the most important merits of a Free operating system that GNU/Linux is. And it's very cool to be 'nuxified and free! ;) Thx Daniel |
| jimf Jul 25, 2005 8:06 PM EDT |
Daniel, If by fight you mean continued advocacy, I agree... But if you mean that people should just continue to shout at each other, then nothing is ever accomplished. Again, You don't gain converts to any idea without respect for others, even if you believe that they are entirely misled. The other point was that an OS, any OS, should be judged on its merit's regardless of origin. I believe that to be true. But, whether or not open source is a better development model than proprietary is an entirely different (though far from unimportant) issue and well beyond the scope of this article, however, the same idea of reasonable discussion rather than fanatical put-downs would still apply. |
| dotmil Jul 25, 2005 10:41 PM EDT |
My $0.02 on this is I think jimf is absolutely correct. I converted myself to Linux years ago simply because, for me, it makes more sense, it has the software I want, built how I want (or I can change it if need be), and I find it to be of higher quality than similar proprietary software. So for me, it is the best tool, and that's why I use it. Now, I understand some people ( the minority of users, and definitely minority of long-term users) use it because they hate Microsoft plain and simple. That's fine and dandy by me, but I think it overlooks one important issue, using the best tool for the job. If you hate hammers, but have a job that requires one, would you instead find a rock to pound with? Lame analogy I know, but the point is the same. If someone else uses or even enjoys hammers, who are we to tell them otherwise? The point is, each person decides for themselves, on their own desktop (at least as far as personal use at home goes) what tools to use and why. For some it's ease of use, maximum compatibility, or because of one "killer app" only offered on that platform. For many (I would suggest most of the home user market), they simply *do* see the computer as a tool. They use what it came with, and rarely if ever consider anything else. For us geeks, that concept may be hard to see and remember, but in my experience its true. Now, if you're feeling like trying to get someone to use your rock instead of a hammer do you think they would be receptive to you cursing the hammer repeatedly, telling them how the hammer is going to ruin the world, and possibly verbally assaulting them for even considering it. Or would they respond better to you explaining why the rock is better, maybe even taking the time to show them? I'm sure we can see which method would likely have greater success. See, it's the same with your own OS choice. Many MS fanboys see Linux users as screaming, Microsoft hating, egomaniacs. When you go to a forum and scream how terrible Microsoft is, or how they are threatening the safety and/or freedom of the world you only reinforce the sterotype. We all procalim loudly how we like Linux for the choices we have, but then some of use use that to try to take away the choices of others. If they want to choose MS then fine, don't belittle them and act like a hate-filled zealot. Respect their choice and move on to someone who is looking to try all their options. I think the point is, we're not trying to recruit for some pseudo-religious cult here. We're not based on hatred of some corporation. We're based on Freedom and the freedom to choose, which has to include the freedom to choose an option you or I may not like. I mean, even Linus himself likes PowerPoint. I guess he's just a clueless M$ Winblowz luser in some folks eyes. Freedom can't be accomplished by forcing your views, beliefs, or choices on others. And for the majority of computer owners in the world, yes the software (to include OS) is simply a tool; a means to an end. And it's their choice and freedom to choose how to get to that end; not ours to force on them. |
| Abe Jul 26, 2005 8:23 AM EDT |
My $0.02 on this is I think jimf is absolutely correct. I converted myself to Linux years ago simply because, for me, it makes more sense, it has the software I want, built how I want (or I can change it if need be), and I find it to be of higher quality than similar proprietary software. So for me, it is the best tool, and that's why I use it. Now, I understand some people ( the minority of users, and definitely minority of long-term users) use it because they hate Microsoft plain and simple. That's fine and dandy by me, but I think it overlooks one important issue, using the best tool for the job. This is a good post, you show unbiased, logical, understanding and you show respect to the opinions of others. I am sure you have the best of intentions, but we all say things that sometimes, unintentionally could cause harm to our cause or gets interpreted the wrong way by others. Using “absolutely correct” you are too assertively generalizing even though you preceded it with “I think”. I myself would have used “I agree with” instead. If you hate hammers, but have a job that requires one, would you instead find a rock to pound with? Lame analogy I know, but the point is the same. I am sorry, but I disagree, the point is not the same due to the analogy being lame. And if you knew that already, why didn't you find a better one? Lame analogies weakens the point and sometimes is counter productive. I would have used the same analogy but instead of comparing a hammer to a stone, compare a hammer model A with model B hammer. This way you only emphasizing preference rather than making Linux look like the old ancient tool compared to the more modern powerful tool that windows is! Choice of analogy is extremely important to drive a point and to avoid unintentional harm. If someone else uses or even enjoys hammers, who are we to tell them otherwise? The point is, each person decides for themselves, on their own desktop (at least as far as personal use at home goes) what tools to use and why. For some it's ease of use, maximum compatibility, or because of one "killer app" only offered on that platform. For many (I would suggest most of the home user market), they simply *do* see the computer as a tool. They use what it came with, and rarely if ever consider anything else. Now we come to the stupidity part, who else is in their right mind would chose a stone over a hammer? Another thing is, you didn't consider the external factors that influence people decisions. When MS was copying ideas, riping code, hooking users, and brainwashing minds, we were jumping on their bandwagon in droves because, at the time, they were the only company to offer PC OS and applications. That went on for a while with MS killing other companies using its powerful marketing, monopoly, buyouts and unfair practices until FOSS came along. MS started feeling the heat and started resorting to all kind of sleazy tactics that are unimaginable. Many people started to wake up and started to “fight” back. You see, goodness and evil can't coexist and it is a constant war. Part of this war against evil is to enlighten people and advocate for what is best for all. Exposing the worst of evil is one way to achieve the goal. So you don't just give evil the whole playing field to do what it wants or desires. MS had this opportunity for a while and they abused it. Now FOSS community is not going to stand by and idle. Yes, there are different ways of accomplishing that but one thing I don't agree with is to take away the freedom from people to decide for themselves. FOSS stands for Freedom. But, I don't agree to stand by and let MS have their reign. That, would be un-American For us geeks, that concept may be hard to see and remember, but in my experience its true. Now, if you're feeling like trying to get someone to use your rock instead of a hammer do you think they would be receptive to you cursing the hammer repeatedly, telling them how the hammer is going to ruin the world, and possibly verbally assaulting them for even considering it. Or would they respond better to you explaining why the rock is better, maybe even taking the time to show them? I'm sure we can see which method would likely have greater success. See, it's the same with your own OS choice. Many MS fanboys see Linux users as screaming, Microsoft hating, egomaniacs. When you go to a forum and scream how terrible Microsoft is, or how they are threatening the safety and/or freedom of the world you only reinforce the sterotype. We all procalim loudly how we like Linux for the choices we have, but then some of use use that to try to take away the choices of others. If they want to choose MS then fine, don't belittle them and act like a hate-filled zealot. Respect their choice and move on to someone who is looking to try all their options. Again, we are generalizing and making it look like that is the only way we use to gain converts. If you read the Talk Backs on Zdnet and similar sites you sure get this impression. Well I think we are making too much out of a minor problem. Self criticism is healthy and constructive, but I think we need to ease it a bit because we are getting a whole lot of enough criticism from the enemy and its lackeys. I think we should be concentrating more on other battles we have to fight that are more important and crucial to us. I think the point is, we're not trying to recruit for some pseudo-religious cult here. We're not based on hatred of some corporation. We're based on Freedom and the freedom to choose, which has to include the freedom to choose an option you or I may not like. I mean, even Linus himself likes PowerPoint. I guess he's just a clueless M$ Winblowz luser in some folks eyes. Freedom can't be accomplished by forcing your views, beliefs, or choices on others. And for the majority of computer owners in the world, yes the software (to include OS) is simply a tool; a means to an end. And it's their choice and freedom to choose how to get to that end; not ours to force on them. Right you are. But coming form a FOSS user and supporter, some of the statements could insinuate that the problem is major and wide spread. Well it it does exist but it is not major. The FOSS community is human. We strive for perfection but we will never be no matter how hard we try. Paying too much attention to this issue could create the wrong impression that there is some truth to many of the wrongly stated criticisms publicized by many of the anti-FOSS in the media. There are too many so called investigative journalists and writes who feel threatened by FOSS and have ulterior motives to stop FOSS because they believe that MS is their only source of their bread and butter. Please don't take this post personally. It is meant to be a response to all of the many posts by FOSS users and supports who feel this is a serious problem. In my opinion It is not. And if we think we are going to eliminate it, think again. We can only minimize it but we have to be careful not to harm ourselves in the process. Let us not duel too much on it. |
| Theoden Jul 26, 2005 1:09 PM EDT |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!