The Linux Revolution: What Happened?

Let's check out what's happenning in yonder room.
There are two people there, each sitting in front
of a computer.

One's running Linux, and the other is running Windows.

Which is which? They both have screens filled with very similar
eye-candy and they both have a mouse in their right hands.

They are both watching movies, listening to music (or downloading
either), or playing video games or shopping or babbling inanities
on "chat rooms" or with IM.

You can't tell which is which by just watching them, without
knowing one or the other OS very well indeed. And the differences
that can be perceived from "over their shoulders" are
superficial.

Let's look deeper:

One difference is that the Linux box is somewhat more secure and
stable than the Windows box, although the Windows box is still up
and running well most of the time.

The Windows OS cost more than the Linux box, but most people
still pay for Linux, some more than others.

But the Windows box does do a better job, by-and-large, at these
mindless entertainment programs, with their Linux clones usually
lagging behind in time and perforance.

This is what the Linux Revolution has come to for most
people: Trying like hell to become just like Windows.

It's a crying shame. An utter travesty.

What do the rest of the Linux people do? Use the
Computer-Internet as the most incredible information sharing tool
has ever existed, rather than as a virtual shopping mall.

They learn about the world and its staggering challenges, and
discuss solutions. This is _very_ entertaining. And it is also
hard work. You have to study and think.

When they want to watch a movie, they turn on their televisions,
rent a video, or go to a theatre. When they want to play games,
they call some friends, grab a frisbee, and go to the park, or
find someone to play board or card games with. Real people.

When they want to listen to music, they turn on the FM radio,
where they can find every style of music that exists, in
hi-fidelity, and record whatever they want to record for
later. Or they play musical instruments with their friends
or go to concerts and other live performances.

When they want to talk to someone, just for company, they
find a real person to talk to. Or use their telephone, which
is a lot more intimate and rewarding than a "chat room" or IM.

If the Linux runner in that room had been of the non-Windows-Wannabee sort, you'd be able to tell the difference in the two with
no problem at all.

The Linux runner would be typing, not clicking a mouse, and most
of the time the screen would be filled with plain text on a
simple background.

Oh, there'd be a lot of images too, but they wouldn't be
eye-candy, and you wouldn't see any videos or hear any music
coming from their computer.

All three of these consume incredible amounts of bandwidth and
system resources which in turn demand greater amounts of hardware
(mining/refining/manufacturing/distributing/storing/construction)
and energy, which in turn do un-necessary harm to an environment
already under serious stress.

The idea that the Computer-Internet is somehow non-physical and
doesn't impact the environment, is simply ludicrous. But a lot
of people cling to that delusion with great tenacity.

Then there's the fact that the bandwidth of the Internet, which
is tied to a very phsycal infrstructure, is finite, and when
a minority of the world's population hog most of it for their
mindless entertainment and crass commercialism, others around the
world are left out. They do without a connection at all so that a
bunch of mindless consumers can have a high-speed connection.

Once again: a crying shame. A travesty. Linux should have
nothing to do with it.

It should be DIFFERENT than Windows, not struggling to be
just like it.

Otherwise, what is the fucking POINT!?


AC

--
http://home.earthlink.net/~alanconnor/
http://angel.1jh.com./nanae/kooks/alanconnor.html

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 13:24:20 +0000, Alan Connor wrote:

>
> Let's check out what's happenning in yonder room.
> There are two people there, each sitting in front
> of a computer.
>
> One's running Linux, and the other is running Windows.

<snip>

Yes...you have made some valid points for sure...

I run numerous operating systems here...
but mainly use Linux and Windows.

Although in general windows has been working OK for me...
in a way it's really *insane*

It seems that I'm spending so much time just maintaining the system:
updating and running spyware/adware checkers.
updating and running a virus checker.
installing windows updates.
defragging the file system...

it's crazy

some of the die-hard windows folks say:
hey...just set your updates and virus checks etc/ to "automatic"

that's really great to be in the middle of doing some heavy photoshop
editing to have out virus checker decide to perform a scan...
or having a window pop up and ask you if you want to reboot...now that the
windows update has taken place etc.

anyway...for now i'm multibooting and just running the best OS i have for
the job i'm doing.

kind of like having both phillips and straight blade screw drivers in my
tool kit

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 13:24:20 +0000, Alan Connor wrote:

>
> Let's check out what's happenning in yonder room.
> There are two people there, each sitting in front
> of a computer.
>
> One's running Linux, and the other is running Windows.

<snip>

Yes...you have made some valid points for sure...

I run numerous operating systems here...
but mainly use Linux and Windows.

Although in general windows has been working OK for me...
in a way it's really *insane*

It seems that I'm spending so much time just maintaining the system:
updating and running spyware/adware checkers.
updating and running a virus checker.
installing windows updates.
defragging the file system...

it's crazy

some of the die-hard windows folks say:
hey...just set your updates and virus checks etc/ to "automatic"

that's really great to be in the middle of doing some heavy photoshop
editing to have out virus checker decide to perform a scan...
or having a window pop up and ask you if you want to reboot...now that the
windows update has taken place etc.

anyway...for now i'm multibooting and just running the best OS i have for
the job i'm doing.

kind of like having both phillips and straight blade screw drivers in my
tool kit

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 13:24:20 +0000, Alan Connor wrote:

> It should be DIFFERENT than Windows, not struggling to be
> just like it.

It's as different as the person running it wants it to be, doofus.

> Otherwise, what is the fucking POINT!?

What's yours, you psychotic dimwit?

--
If you're not on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Linux Registered User #327951

Dan C (youmustbejoking@invalid.lan) writes:
> On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 13:24:20 +0000, Alan Connor wrote:
>
>> It should be DIFFERENT than Windows, not struggling to be
>> just like it.
>
> It's as different as the person running it wants it to be, doofus.
>
But what we do seem to be seeing is an influx of people who are driven
by other reasons. The same people who have been dependant on Microsoft,
and thus made that company such a big success, some of them have turned
and decided it's wrong. So they come to Linux not because it's Unix-like,
or because it's a great operating system, or because they can fix things
when they don't work or don't work the way they want it to work, but
because they see it as simply a free version of Windows.

Michael

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 13:24:20 +0000, Alan Connor wrote:

>
> Let's check out what's happenning in yonder room.
> There are two people there, each sitting in front
> of a computer.
>
> One's running Linux, and the other is running Windows.
>
> Which is which? They both have screens filled with very similar
> eye-candy and they both have a mouse in their right hands.
>
> They are both watching movies, listening to music (or downloading
> either), or playing video games or shopping or babbling inanities
> on "chat rooms" or with IM.
>
> You can't tell which is which by just watching them, without
> knowing one or the other OS very well indeed. And the differences
> that can be perceived from "over their shoulders" are
> superficial.
>
> Let's look deeper:
>
> One difference is that the Linux box is somewhat more secure and
> stable than the Windows box, although the Windows box is still up
> and running well most of the time.
>
> The Windows OS cost more than the Linux box, but most people
> still pay for Linux, some more than others.
>
> But the Windows box does do a better job, by-and-large, at these
> mindless entertainment programs, with their Linux clones usually
> lagging behind in time and perforance.

I do not agree with your assertion. In many cases OpenSource Software
leads the pack, with MS trying to catch up - one case in point: apache -
still the web server of choice. The place where Linux seems to lag most
(aside from commercial games - and I have better things to do with my
time) is in duplicating MS Office functionality - since MS won't disclose
specs.

>
> This is what the Linux Revolution has come to for most
> people: Trying like hell to become just like Windows.

False. Linux is not trying to become MS.

But it has to have GUI which operates in a similar fashion if it is to
succeed, because that is what people expect.

ray wrote:
> The place where Linux seems to lag most
> (aside from commercial games - and I have better things to do with my
> time) is in duplicating MS Office functionality - since MS won't disclose
> specs.

I don't think it is fair to say that open source software is lacking
when it comes to duplicating MS Office functionality. Open source
projects offer most if not all of the same functionality (or in many
cases *better* functionality). What they lack (due to the lack of MS
specs) is the ability to import/export MS Office files. (But many
Windows programs suffer from the same problem, and there can even be
inconsistencies sending files between between different versions of MS
Office.)

I'd say it's interoperability, rather than functionality, where the open
source apps lag.

> I'd say it's interoperability, rather than functionality, where the open
> source apps lag.

Interoperability among Open Source programs is generally excellent.
Interoperability with Microsoft programs is reportedly lacking, but why is
that a deficiency in Open Source and not in Microsoft when Open Source
seeks it and Microsoft avoids it?
--
John Hasler
john@dhh.gt.org
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA

John-Paul Stewart <jpstewart@binaryfoundry.ca> wrote:

> > The place where Linux seems to lag most
> > (aside from commercial games - and I have better things to do with my
> > time) is in duplicating MS Office functionality - since MS won't disclose
> > specs.
>
> I don't think it is fair to say that open source software is lacking
> when it comes to duplicating MS Office functionality. Open source
> projects offer most if not all of the same functionality (or in many
> cases *better* functionality). What they lack (due to the lack of MS
> specs) is the ability to import/export MS Office files. (But many
> Windows programs suffer from the same problem, and there can even be
> inconsistencies sending files between between different versions of MS
> Office.)
>
> I'd say it's interoperability, rather than functionality, where the open
> source apps lag.

You're right. I don't think we need better Office import/export filters
though, we need a culture change for business practices that recognises
open, or at least more portable, files formats. ATM if someone sends me
a Word doc or Excel spreadsheet that OOo doesn't handle well (quite rare
now but it happens) there's nothing I can do. Complaining just gets a
"use Office then" response (not from everyone, there are some good
people out there, but you get the idea) and if it happens to be an
important client I'm screwed if I want to use OOo and their docs or
sheets don't work properly. It would be nice to have the "right" to ask
for another, more usable file format.

If a document doesn't need to be changed by the recipient I usually make
a PDF (not perfect but it works) but Windows is behind and can't create
PDFs without extra software so it's rare that I get sent a PDF.

--
Andy.

John Hasler wrote:
>>I'd say it's interoperability, rather than functionality, where the open
>>source apps lag.
>
>
> Interoperability among Open Source programs is generally excellent.

Agreed.

> Interoperability with Microsoft programs is reportedly lacking, but why is
> that a deficiency in Open Source and not in Microsoft when Open Source
> seeks it and Microsoft avoids it?

It's only a (perceived) deficiency because MS Office documents have
become de facto standards. Too many people assume that everybody has MS
Word.