[wplug] WIRED

mdanish at andrew.cmu.edu mdanish at andrew.cmu.edu
Thu Sep 13 21:58:49 EDT 2001


On Thu, Sep 13, 2001 at 07:46:30PM -0400, Patrick Weber wrote:
> If you haven't yet seen it, pick up a copy of October's issue of WIRED 
> Magazine.  There is an excellent analysis of the state of Linux 
> there.  Essentially they ask the questions:
> 	1. What is Linux really good at?
> 	2. What is holding Linux back?
> Really the one area that Linux surpasses nearly any other OS out there is 
> in the server market.  That is one market that remains unconquered and 
> highly competetive.  There is the real shot at Linux making it into the 
> mainstream business community.  As the article points out, the desktop war 
> is lost.  FACE IT!!! Microsoft has really won on the desktop, that cannot 
One of the wonderful things about Linux is that you are free to do whatever
you wish with it.

This includes competing against software giants.

> be avoided.  So why not then focus attention on an area that Linux can 
> really dominate?  If concentrated efforts were made at improving and 
> perfecting Linux as a server alternative, then it could dominate Sun's 
> UNIX, IBM's AIX, and Microsoft's NT. Hands Down.  Too much time has been 
> devoted to creating half baked software concoctions for the desktop user 
> that simply don't work.  Look at the dozen's of office suites that are 
That's because they all try to be Microsoft Word/Office.  But Microsoft
Word/Office is *crap*.  We have computers, they are not typewriters, they
are computers.  Welcome to the world of intelligent typesetting engines.
On Linux you ought to be using LaTeX/LyX.  Or similar.  It's free, it's
better, why do we have to repeat poor, past designs?

Of course I'm not going to stop people from coming out with or using
these office suites.  Some people have to learn the hard way.

> unusable.  Name one solid graphical development environment.  These efforts 
Emacs.  Vim.  etc.

If you need anything else, you'd better be working with something like
Smalltalk that has it's own environment, cause those two are fine development
environments and don't let any Microsoft marketing FUD tell you otherwise.

The Lisp REPL beats the shit out of any development environment out there
today and it's older than many of you.  And it's not "graphical" either
(though that really doesn't matter, feel free to create a graphical
syntax for s-expressions, they are just trees.)  Graphics as a development
environment is not very effective, because it is clumsy.

Whoever says one picture is worth a thousand words is being superficial:

One word evokes a thousand pictures.


> are essentially useless and only prove the point that Linux is not ready 
> for the desktop and never will be, in the universal sense.
What is the desktop?

1. The top of a desk.

2. A metaphor that was invented for one particular interface that has it's
   own set of problems.

I'd rather see work on a better metaphor than the "desktop".  Too bad it
would never get accepted due to sheer momentum.  But you gotta fight
the good fight, right?


> 
> The other point that the article makes is how the attitudes of the Linux 
> community impact the impressions of Linux in the "outside world".  First 
> let me say that I have only had positive experiences with this particular 
> group.  However, I think we can all admit that there are those very elitist 
> and arrogant Linux zealots out there.  Unfortunately they seem to be highly 
> visible to many businesses and can severely impede those businesses 
> willingness to accept Linux.  Many times I have experience extremely rude 

I have seen a lot of people who want to make Linux into Windows.  And I say,
stay with Windows if it makes you happy.

When you come to Linux, why should we cater to the poor way that Microsoft
conducts matters?

When I tell people that they should use LyX instead of <name your favorite
Word clone> they tell me that it's not like Word.  I tell them, that's
correct---it's better.  But you can only lead a horse to water, what
they want is more of the same old sickly sweet syrup.  Because they're
used to it.  And try to argue with that.  When you come to Linux, you
should be flexible, because things are different.

Not so strangely, I often see much of the same issues with Lisp.  There
are Lisp elitists who often seem arrogant to outsiders.  Lisp is a language
fundamentally different from most others out there.  It is the second oldest
programming language (family, really) that is still in use, next to Fortran.
And it's maturation was separate from the descendents of Fortran and Algol.  
A community has grown around Lisp that has different ideas than the 
mainstream, as a result.

Once you grasp the inherent power in the language, it's hard to go back
to other languages because you keep seeing their flaws.  And when you see
their flaws it's easy to criticize them.  Watching the mainstream jump
on XML and OOP causes snickering in the Lisp community due to the hyping
of these "new" ideas.  Structured data (Lisp programs *are* structured data),
and abstracted representation is old hat.  And being forced to work with
what one considers to be inferior is a surefire way of inciting frustration
which is often interpreted as arrogance.

Similarly in Linux, an alternative community has sprung up with different
ideas about running a system.  Correction: many alternative communities
have sprung up.  Telling a *Linux user that Linux should be a single
group is like telling a person from East Asia that they should all be
one country.  

In the Linux world you have many choices, in the Windows world there is 
only one: and it may seem patronizing when Linux users say "It's too bad 
you only have one option" but it's true.

When a Windows user decides to migrate to Linux and then discovers that
XYZ-program is not present, either they whine or they look for alternatives.
And often when they look for alternatives, they find something which does
what they want but in a different fashion.  And either they adapt to
it or they whine "Why isn't ABC-program just like XYZ-program in Windows?"
And whining isn't appreciated anywhere.  Most programs in Linux are volunteer
efforts.  Help them, don't sit there and complain.  Not to imply that all 
Linux programs are perfect, but being different is not wrong.

Since Linux is mostly a volunteer effort, one has to be somewhat more
independent than the commercial world where one can always cry into
the shoulder of the vendor and hope they fix things.  Of course, if you
still need that, then you should stick to that.  And I know that constitutes
a great deal of the arrogance behind Linux zealots, but quite seriously: if
you can't stand on your own then be prepared to fall.  It's true anywhere
else and it's true here too.  That's not saying you can't get up and try
again; that's how learning works.

Open-source is a big part of that independence.  Open source is not about
pirating software, as so many unknowing business people may think.  Open
source is about freedom from reliance on the author/vendor of the software.
Once you free yourself from from the mind-shackles that Microsoft and others
have put on you ("You cannot see the source, you are blind, a lame user")
it's hard to put them back on.  So you have the crowd that is "rabidly"
Open-source, and while they may seem elitist ("How dare they be less
encumbered than us") put yourself in their shoes and ask yourself
if you really want to go back to being at the mercy of a company who
probably does not have your best interests in mind.


> behavior from Linux users.  You see this on many sites such as Slashdot 

Also keep in mind that these people aren't trained public relations
monkeys either.  Personalities vary, not everyone is friendly, not
everyone is having a good day, not everyone feels the need to act as
technical support (especially those who have worked tech support in
the past *!* ;).

> etc.  Many of these people are driven more by a hatred for Microsoft than 
Hate runs both ways.  And we're not out here to stop hate, we have more
attainable goals.

> for an honest appreciation for what is a very solid and reliable operating 
> system.  You and I know that these zealots are not the majority of Linux 
> users.  Most of us are sincerely interested in either using the OS or 
> developing for and expanding it.  Yet, as long as Linux is perceived to lay 
> within the realm of ultrageekdom and arrogant exclusive rebels, it will 
> never gain the respect it deserves.
Linux will always be *perceived* to lay within the realm of ultrageekdom
and arrogant exclusive rebels so long as it persists in being different.
People these days think that all computers should act the same, because
they don't understand that there are differences, that there are
communities of users, there is heritage even.

There is a huge social divide, on one side are those who are enthusiastic
about their computers and try to learn much about them, and then there are
those who don't care about them at all and just want to use them as a tool.

And that's quite alright, but what they don't seem to understand is that
you must learn how to use a tool properly.  And there is no tool as versatile
and as convoluted as a computer.  Knowing how to use a ballpoint pen
does not give the knowledge of how to use a fountain pen.  Let's take the
example of cars, often used to justify the creation of lookalike interfaces.
They may all use the same interface, but do they all handle the same?
So in fact, you have to "learn" a car before you can safely drive it.
And to get even more control, you need to drive a standard transmission,
which requires a wholly different interface.  Now, when you go and buy
a sporty car, most people want the control of the stick shift.  Are these
people being snooty, because they don't want the equivalent of a pokey 
mini-van with an automatic transmission?  In Linux, when you use a different
interface (say the command shell), are you being snooty because you don't
want the equivalent of a pokey GUI that was designed by someone at Microsoft
(the so-called world software leaders)?  Is there a difference?  And why
is there one if so?

Is it too much to ask that one be familiar with the different ways
one's tools behave?  Is the futility of unscrewing a regular screw with
a Phillips screwdriver the fault of the tool or the fault of the user?
Should one go away and be replaced entirely by the other?


So I'll stand with the "ultrageek and arrogant exclusive rebels" for now;
I want to see Linux be different.  So I'll do my part, and let other people
do what they will.

Of course, better documentation wouldn't hurt :) Reading never hurt anyone.
Is it elitist to expect basic literacy before using a computer?


As for the server market, it seems Linux is doing quite well.  But I don't
see how conquering the server market would change the perception of
Linux as an ultrageek-system.

> 
> The WIRED article is one of the most sincere, unbiased, honest evaluations 
> of the current state of Linux.  It is well worth a read.
> 
> --patrick
> 

(Why do I always write too much when I have homework...)

-- 
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
;; Matthew Danish                         email: mdanish at andrew.cmu.edu ;;
;; OpenPGP public key available from:        'finger mrd at db.debian.org' ;;
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;



More information about the wplug mailing list