Linux Linux Linux Part Two - Crossing the Linux Fault Threshold

I had decided a few months earlier to install Linux because it was cool (I maintain to this day, that this is the only valid reason for a desktop user to install Linux). I was all set up, I had my beautiful beloved Vaio laptop, all I needed was a Linux. I decided to go for the "Mandrake Linux" distribution, because a) one of my email buddies had told me it was the easiest to install, and b) they were giving it away free on the cover of a computer magazine that week, and I was fucked if I was going to pay for "free software". Yes, yes, I've read "The Cathedral and the Bazaar", but let me point out to you that if you've been boasting to your honey for three weeks about how cool you are for installing "free software" and the first thing you do is come home with a box you paid $99.99 for, then she's going to laugh pretty hard. And the laughter of a beautiful woman can feel surprisingly emasculating, particularly when you're feeling a little dumb yourself, and a hundred bucks out of pocket. So Mandrake it was.

Here is my first comment of substance on the subject of Linux, which is certainly applicable to the so-called "newbie distro" produced by Mandrake, but which, I think, has more general application.

They broke my fucking computer.

Perhaps it is because they are French, and perhaps the words have a different connotation in that magical language, but I venture to say that when Mandrake use the word "resize", as in

"Would you like to resize your Windows partition?
(best said with a subtly sardonic Parisian accent)

... they do not perhaps realise that most people are going to assume that they mean "resize" in the sense of "make bigger or smaller by stretching or squashing, perhaps affecting the internal bits somewhat in the process, but basically retaining the structural integrity of the thing". When you use the word "resize" to a normal English speaker, he does not assume that the word means "delete a chunk of, irrevocably, without first checking whether something vital is on it, then render yourself unable to find that deleted block ever again".

This is the basic problem with the much-vaunted "newbie-friendly" Mandrake Installer; five times out of the six I tried it, its two main functions appeared to be to

Seek out and render inoperable any copies of Windows hanging around and
Itself fail to install properly.

When operating systems are something about which you have never had cause to think in your pre-Linux career, and when you find yourself staring at a blank screen where a desktop should be, reading in an old school font the words "Missing Operating System", and when you do not know what the hell those words mean, then I must tell you that you tend to go pretty sour, pretty quickly, on the people who put you up to installing the fucking thing in the first place. So it was with me and Linux. If you knew me during the Linux period, and if you gave me some advice on how to deal with my computer then know this; the only reason I didn't threaten to sue you, call you a useless shit-heel and send you the very nastiest virus I could find, is that with my computer completely fer-zucked by Linux, I was unable to get in touch with you to do so. I don't know anybody who knows a fucking thing about computers (the reason for this is that I am not working class). I am not prepared to shell out money for someone to mend my fucking computer; that's what warranties are for. I chucked away the warranty card for my computer the moment I opened the box. Cut off the web connection of my one and only computer, and I am truly and utterly on my own. So that's when I started buying books.

Books are one thing I will buy, because I am a bit of an old sap for the feel of the pages between my fingers and the wonderfully brainy weight of a briefcase full of paperbacks on esoteric subjects. On the other hand, I must confess to having developed a burgeoning resentment of the false advertising of "Free Software" and a growing sympathy for the transparently propagandistic Microsoft concept of "Total Concept of Ownership" when faced with the following calculation:

Microsoft Windows:
• Cost of operating system: $0 (came with the computer)
• Cost of applications: $299 (proper copy of Office, couple of games)
• Money spent on books relating to Microsoft Windows: $0 (the very idea of buying one would have seemed weird to me)
• Time spent reading books: 2hrs/year (occasionally looking up how to write macros in the manual)
Linux:
• Cost of operating system: $3.95 (the magazine was fucking useless except for the CD)
• Cost of applications: $0
• Money spent on books: $200 (vast numbers of them seemed to need to be bought to understand what the hell was going on and no one book explained anything properly)
•Cost of sitting around drinking nasty coffee in dingy internet cafes trying to work out how the fuck I was going to get my modem to work again: $40
• Cost of entire new fucking computer after I found out that I wasn't going to be able to, because fucking Linux doesn't support it: $500
• Time spent reading books: all my free time for a fucking week.
You see how the cost mounts up. And that was just to get my computer fucking working again. Christ knows how much time and expense I'm going to be put through if I ever decide to do anything with it.

In any case, I find it necessary to mention at this point the people who helped me get my computer back into action. These are a group of people to whom I feel a degree of gratitude, because they helped to rescue me from the peculiar hell which is the Mandrake installer with handy tips like "yes, the default size of partition is 2Mb for root and 0.5Mb for /usr, no, nobody knows why". But only a degree, because they refrained from giving me the best piece of advice possible, which would have been "don't fucking bother". This merry bunch of pranksters go by the name in the online community of "Linux advocates". The word "advocate" comes from the Scottish term for a lawyer charged with the hopeless task of defending an obviously guilty suspect, and is common parlance among computer types (see the Jargon File) for a mindless zealot who has mistaken the market share of his preferred computer operating system for the girth of his penis, and who believes it to be vitally important that "his" (no, never her) operating system is marketed as efficiently as possible by word of mouth to ludicrously inappropriate consumers.

However, in the case of Linux, it is inappropriate to call the zealots "OS advocates", as the vast majority of their time is not spent on comparing the features of Linux with those of other operating systems, but rather on making up excuses for the shortcomings of Linux on the desktop, and boasting about the stability and speed of Linux installations (usually webservers) utterly incomparable from the one they are recommending you install. You may think I am making this up; I wish I were. I have lost count of the number of times a Linux zealot has seen fit to bring up the subject of the hosting of Slashdot ("and numerous big companies like IBM!") in the context of a conversation about why I can't read my fucking documents any more. It is for this reason that I have coined the following truism:

Windows and MacOS have "advocates"; Linux has "apologists".

Conversations with Linux apologists tend to have three distinct phases:

Very erudite-sounding discussion of your problem in terms of software projects which are either pre-alpha vaporware or, more likely, entirely theoretical ideas once floated on Slashdot. ("Yes, what would solve your problem would be the integration of Samba into the kernel with the correct RFS extensions. I think that this is a problem that Alan Cox is working on in the unstable release of Debian 4.9.01a")
Grudging acceptance that there is no very good or workable solution to your problem under Linux, coupled with castigation of the iniquities of the software industry. ("Well, of course the real trouble is that HP won't open the driver source specifications so the project has to be carried out on the island of Nauru. Damn that DMCA! I heard Bruce Perens talking about a secret data repository under the sea like in this Neal Stephenson novel ...."
Banging on for hours and hours about how fucking wonderful Apache is, if you let them. ("... and even Microsoft runs it for 83% of their intranet servers according to recent Gartner surveys and it really shows that Free Software works in the business environment and it was just put together by this bunch of guys and it just goes to prove ...."

The important concept to bear in mind when discussing software issues with Linux apologists is the "Linux Fault Threshold". Clever use of this concept helps you to avoid losing your temper with someone who might actually be able to render practical help, while ensuring that you give the correct dose of venom (60cc of scorpion juice, administered per anem with a rusty syringe) to the vast crowd of mindless apologists who just want you to use their pet operating system because it makes them feel good and gives them something to boast about on Slashdot. I provide this as a service to all the blind, alcoholic, incontinent grandmothers out there who appear to be installing Linux without any trouble if the Slashdot comments on any article remotely related to user interface design are to be believed.

The Linux Fault Threshold is the point in any conversation about Linux at which your interlocutor stops talking about how your problem might be solved under Linux and starts talking about how it isn't Linux's fault that your problem cannot be solved under Linux. Half the time, the LFT is reached because there is genuinely no solution (or no solution has been developed yet), while half the time, the LFT is reached because your apologist has floundered way out of his depth in offering to help you and is bullshitting far beyond his actual knowledge base. In either case, a conversation which has reached the LFT has precisely zero chance of ever generating useful advice for you; it is safe at this point to start calling the person offering the advice a fucking moron, and basically take it from there. Here's an example taken from IRC logs to help you understand the concept.

<jsm> Why won't my fucking Linux computer print?
<linuxbabe> what printer r u using?
<jsm> I don't know. It's a Hewlett Packard desktop inkjet number
<linuxbabe> hewlett r lamers. they dont open source drivers <------LFT closely approached!
<linuxbabe> but we reverse engineered them lol. check the web. or ask hewlett for linux suuport??<------ but avoided, he's still talking about the problem
<jsm> Thanks. I already did that. But I can't install the drivers on my fucking computer. I've got a floppy disk from HP, but my floppy drive is a USB drive and Linux doesn't have fucking USB support.
<linuxbabe> linux DOES have USB support!!!!!!
<jsm> yeh for fucking infrared mice, and for about a thousand makes of webcam it does. Get real here. For my fucking floppy disk drive, I am telling you through bitter experience it does not. Even if someone has written the drivers in the last week
<jsm> which I sincerely doubt, how the hell am I going to install them given that my floppy drive doesnt work?????
<jsm> this ought to be in the kernel. what good is a fucking operating system that doesnt operate?
<linuxbabe> Imacs dont have floppy drives at all <----- useless point, but not LFT. All apologists make pointless jabs at other OSs
<linuxbabe> so you ought to be greateful that Linux does. drivers like that shouldn't be bundled in the kernel
<linuxbabe> makes it into fucking M$ bloatware. bleh
<linuxbabe> download drivers from the web!!!! apt-get is your friend
<jsm> So everyone keeps telling me. Unfortunately the fucking modem doesn't work under Linux either, and since the Linux installation destroyed Windows, that leaves me kind of fucked.
<linuxbabe> Linux doesnt destroy windows
<jsm>mandrake installer does. It "resized" my Windows partition and now the fucker won't work
<linuxbabe> you shuold have defragmented. windows scatters data all over your hard drive so the installer cant just find a clean chunk to install into. it isn't linux fault <---- distinct signs of LFT being approached
<linuxbabe> that windoze disk management blows
<jsm> so why doesn't my fucking modem work?
<linuxbabe> what computer hav u got
<jsm> A Sony Vaio PCG
<linuxbabe> that doesn't have a modem
<jsm> I assure you it fucking does. I used to use it to check my email back in the days when Windows worked.
<linuxbabe> its got a winmodem. thats not a modem <----- nitpicking over technical terms is a sign of impending LFT
<jsm> what do you mean?
<linuxbabe> a winmodem isnt a proper modem. it just uses proprietary windoze apis. doesnt do the work of a modem at all.
<jsm> Very interesting. Now how do I get the fucker to work with Linux?
<linuxbabe> well the trouble is that micro$oft won't open up the drivers they just keep it proprietary and becos theyr a monopoly all the lameass manufacturers fall into line
LFT REACHED !!!!!
<jsm> So in other words, my fucking modem is never going to work with Linux at all?
<linuxbabe> no no no. in the first place you never had a modem you had a winmodem. in the second place its M$ fault that the drivers are closed and you can go to jail for trying to reverse engineer them like this guy dimitri skylab and the DMCA. its nothing to do with linux that M$ fills the world with its proprietary crap
<jsm> But in terms of actually getting my computer to work with Linux, I get the impression that it won't?
<linuxbabe> M$ should have to open up the drivers have you read CatB? and vaio sucks because they won't open up their standards either.
<jsm> Congratulations on wasting half an hour of my life, you fucking loser. And stop pretending to be a fucking woman. Your advice is useless. You, and the other hundred members of the so called fucking Linux community for which you stand, have broken my computer, wasted my time, patronised me senseless, revealed your lack of real knowledge, patronised me again and you *still* can't get something as simple as a fucking laptop computer to fucking work. Your so called free fucking software, like your
<jsm> so called fucking free advice, is still too fucking expensive. I cannot believe that you have so little fucking self-respect that in order to find the attention you clearly crave, you have to spend your life lying about the usability of a fucking computer operating system, purely for the joy of creating problems which you can then pretend to solve. You are worse than a fucking fireman who sets buildings on fire. I have had enough of your fucking Munchausen-by-proxy version of tech support. Now get off
<jsm> this fucking channel, hunt down someone who knows what they're fucking doing and bring them here or I will never, repeat never, use your fucking system ag ....
---DISCONNECT ---
That's basically what it's like. Don't ever, ever believe anyone who tells you that you can get technical support from "the community". Because "the community" with whom a computer journalist, website operator or Open Source loudmouth interacts, is not the same community that is open to you.
Next episode: Linux the hard way -- I discard all Microsoft products and head for StarOffice

	OT: Apache. (3.75 / 4) (#17)
	by tkatchev on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 11:48:57 AM PST

	Apache is one godawful piece of shit software. I mean, several megabytes of code for something that basically copies files over TCP/IP? Are you fucking kidding me? Plus, the monstrosity takes up an ungodly amount of system resources. Wake up, serving files over HTTP is not exactly rocket science. It's a second-year college project at most. Saying that Apache is bloated is an understatement; it simply boggles the mind -- personally, I have no idea what they did to accomplish this. I wouldn't be able to make such a bloated HTTP server even if I was working full-time on adding bloat and getting paid for it. Horrible is not the word for it. Heck, even the official GNU version of "Hello World" weighs in at over 250 kilobytes! As a compressed tarball! I am not kidding you, go check for yourself if in doubt. No comment here, words would fail me. P.S. If you think Apache is bad, take a look at BIND. -- Peace and much love...

	Isolated Incident (none / 0) (#42)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 03:45:48 PM PST

	You're right. Bloated shitty software would never capture a majority of the market share. Unless of course, you're talking about Apache or Microsoft.

	Reason (none / 0) (#47)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 03:54:43 PM PST

	The reason apache is so darn bloated is that it is designed to do a lot more than just serving regular webpages. It's designed to handle dynamic pages such as php, and others. It's dumb to use apache for regular webpages. Since apache is a hog for this. You are better of using something much less bloated like THTTP.

	Rocket science? (1.00 / 1) (#45)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 03:53:37 PM PST

	Wake up, serving files over HTTP is not exactly rocket science. It's a second-year college project at most Ah, so that's where Microsoft got IIS from! :)

	Bloated? (none / 0) (#46)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 03:53:55 PM PST

	What are you talking about? This line was taken from `top' of Apache running on Mandrake-Linux: 14659 nobody 768 S 0:01 0.0 0.1 httpd For clarity, those items are: PID, Owner, MEMORY SIZE IN BYTES, Status, Time running(minutes), %CPU, %MEM I have six instances of Apache running, which means that I'm using a whopping 4.5KB of memory. Now I don't know about you, but that much memory just sends my system thrashing.

	Apache sux (5.00 / 2) (#90)
	by Anonymous Reader on Wed Oct 3rd, 2001 at 09:28:28 AM PST

	It absolutely kills the 12mb ram 486 it runs on here. I wish I could afford Windows 2000, bet that would whup ass.

	wtf? (1.00 / 2) (#124)
	by jiminim on Thu Oct 4th, 2001 at 08:56:12 AM PST

	How the hell do you plan to run w2k with 12mb RAM? -Jim -- Avoid the Gates of Hell, use Linux --

	Can We Say Dumb Ass... (1.00 / 1) (#128)
	by Solo on Thu Oct 4th, 2001 at 10:48:07 AM PST

	What is your major malfunction little boy. You really don't believe that you can get W2K to run on anything less than: Minimum Requirements Computer/Processor 133 MHz or higher Pentium-compatible CPU Memory 64 megabytes (MB) of RAM recommended minimum; more memory generally improves responsiveness Hard Disk 2GB hard disk with a minimum of 650MB of free space Does 486 with 12 Meg Ram Meet the Min Requirements for W2K as given by Microsoft, I think not...

	Doh (0.00 / 1) (#212)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Oct 9th, 2001 at 11:28:15 AM PST

	Can you people even begin to spell the word sarcasm. He is kidding.

	Spelling (none / 0) (#219)
	by Craig McPherson on Thu Oct 11th, 2001 at 02:23:43 PM PST

	"Can you people even begin to spell the word sarcasm." S... a... r... k... no, no. S... e... r... no, that's not it. S... a... r... c... h... a... that's not right. S... q... a... r... NO! P... s... a... NO! S... k... a... r... a... s... i... hmm, that seems wrong too. No, no we CAN'T even being to spell the word "sarcasm." -- If you want to know why Lunix is so screwed up, just take a look at the people who use it. Idiocy.

	You're wrong too (none / 0) (#222)
	by Anonymous Reader on Fri Oct 12th, 2001 at 08:01:00 AM PST

	Actually it is size in kB, BUT all that memory is shared amongst the six processes (it's threaded). So apache only uses 700k or ram. Oh wow.

	how about TeX (none / 0) (#122)
	by jsm on Thu Oct 4th, 2001 at 07:53:26 AM PST

	Honestly, the only other open source software package that can even come close to the Apache kitchen sink approach is Emacs, which contains, among other things, its own web browser, news reader and elisp interpreter, which I think we can all agree is totally overboard for a goddamn text editor. You're forgetting TeX, the Turing complete typesetting program. ... the worst tempered and least consistent of the adequacy.org editors ... now also Legal department and general counsel, adequacy.org

	Linus homeless!?! (1.00 / 1) (#110)
	by Anonymous Reader on Wed Oct 3rd, 2001 at 09:28:00 PM PST

	<<I can't wait until he's homeless on the streets going: "Man was I retarded to make such a crappy OS!">> Linus Torvalds lives in Santa Clara, California, USA. He moved here from Helsinki, Finland. He currently works for Transmeta. Linus doesn't sit around in his house JUST hacking the linux kernel. For those of you who absolutely MUST jump on the word HACK or CRACK, hacking the kernel is in no way a reference to hacking or cracking a network. There are also good hackers, bad hackers, and in-betweens. They are known as WHITE HATS, GREY HATS, and BLACK HATS. White Hats >> Think of them as the GOOD GUYS. They are typically hired by companies to test and monitor network security. Black Hats >> The BAD GUYS. They typically hack systems and walk a fine line between hacking and cracking, while sometimes crossing it. Grey Hats >> White hats that use unconventional means of flushing out the bad guys. Along these lines there are a few other, like BLUE HATS, GREEN HATS, etc. These are mostly bullshit in an attempt for teenage wannabe hackers to make a name for themselves. There the guys who find daddy had written down his password to a porn site. They believe this SOMEHOW makes them hackers. Sometimes they are also used for those who hack other OS kernels. Along the lines of WHITE and GREY hats the term Red Hat was created for those who hack the Linux kernel. At least this is the rumor of where the name Red Hat originated.

	Hats - Reminds me of D&D Alignments (1.00 / 2) (#134)
	by Anonymous Reader on Thu Oct 4th, 2001 at 01:10:17 PM PST

	White Hat -- Lawful Good, Paladins Grey Hat -- Chaotic Good, typical Bard or Ranger Black Hat -- Chaotic Evil, Bastarat, Assassin I attack the darkness!!!

	correction (none / 0) (#94)
	by Anonymous Reader on Wed Oct 3rd, 2001 at 09:41:05 AM PST

	MEMORY SIZE IN BYTES No, actually it is memory size in kilobytes, so it is almost 5 megs, not 5 kb.

	wow (none / 0) (#241)
	by Anonymous Reader on Mon Dec 17th, 2001 at 11:55:39 PM PST

	and it goes on. no, memory is not shared between processes and the apache 2 (the first to support real threads) is still beta. yes, 5mb is rediculous for a 99.9% idle vanity webserver.

	Apache is like Perl... (none / 0) (#55)
	by sdem on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 06:23:17 PM PST

	...jack of all trades and master of none. Take Perl for instance. If you want to write, say, a 3D shooter in Perl, you could certainly do it. However, it would be slower than molasses on a cold day, since it wasn't designed with 3D graphics in mind. If you really want to write a decent 3D shooter, you would use C++ or possibly C, because, although it would take longer, they are designed to handle that kind of task and therefore, the benefits would outweigh the costs. Now, look at Apache. Of course it's a bloated pile of shit, it is designed to do everything but slice bread. If you want to use dynamic web pages using, say, Scoop and mod_perl, you can do that easy, and the facilities are already built in. Similarly, you can handle things such as authentication, directory attributes, and other things, including SSL. If you've ever looked at the documentation, there are more or less a million and one different options that you could play around with in the configuration if you really wanted to. If you want to get a small, fast web server for static pages, go with something like Tux. If you want to get something designed to specifically run Perl or PHP, you should probably look at proprietary servers, although I'm not really familiar with those so you'd probably have to do some research. Honestly, the only other open source software package that can even come close to the Apache kitchen sink approach is Emacs, which contains, among other things, its own web browser, news reader and elisp interpreter, which I think we can all agree is totally overboard for a goddamn text editor. If you think Apache is bad, take a look at BIND. You are right, of course. BIND really sucks. Personally, I prefer the clean, standards-compliant Windows 2000 DNS services, as they make things easier when managing enterprise-class networks, as any competant network administrator will tell you.

	your problem (3.00 / 3) (#19)
	by alprazolam on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 12:06:51 PM PST

	I think you way overcomplicated the situation. You seem to have tried to get information about running Mandrake through IRC. Well there's your problem. The only people who use IRC are worthless shit eating goober wannabe perl hackers. The proper way to have somebody install any version of Linux (and same goes for just about any operating system, really) is have somebody smart in these matters doing it. "Business people" have no business attempting to modify the software on their computer, and that's that. Also Linus didn't want people to be able to install it just because they thought it was cool, so he purposefully made it difficult. In closing, the solution to your problems are obvious: 1) stay off of IRC and 2) Don't change the software on your computer without consulting a professional.

	let's see here (2.00 / 2) (#28)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 01:02:25 PM PST

	I really wish you guys at adequacy.org qould quit attacking Windows as a whole when your problems are with a certain distro. They are NOT all equal. If you want a distro that runs on your older system look at other distros. Hopefully we won't see articles like: "I downloaded Yellow Dog and the POS won't run on my PC" Note: Yellow Dog is a Linux distro designed to run on Macs. Why spend so much on books when all the HOWTOs can be found at linux.com or linux.org OEM Windows is NOT free. The manufacturers pay licesing fees to MS which they pass on to the customer. Resizing a partition is just that. Is "squishes everything into unused space. Resising a partition using a utility included with Linux distro is the same as with PArtition Magic. I gather from the article that you are someone who want to point and click your way around an OS and if you can't it's a piece of shit. Linux is not for you. Is Linux ready for the desktop? Yes and No. If you are looking for a multimedia OS then NO it's not. MOST Linux distros DO support USB. Just like Windows it is supported through DRIVERS. Hewlett-Packard offers very nice support for Linux. This belief that driver support and this driver and that driver should be BUILT INTO the kernel is rediculous. Believing that "well it is in Windows" is too. Many people mistakenly believe that the Windows OS and the Windows kernel are the same thing. NTKERNEL does not have a built in GUI, drivers, etc. It is what it is. A KERNEL. A kernel, plus a GUI, software libraries, and everything else makes up the OS. Linux is a kernel. Red Hat Linux, Linux Mandrake, Open Linux, etc. are OSes (aka distros). Same goes with WINDOWS. If everything was built into the kernel, the program would be HUGE. There would also be no control over which services to install because everything would need to be loaded.

	Linux: Not Ready for the Desktop (5.00 / 1) (#40)
	by MessiahWWKD on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 03:15:08 PM PST

	Also Linus didn't want people to be able to install it just because they thought it was cool, so he purposefully made it difficult. And yet people still act as if he has a chance against user-friendly Windows? Sure, Windows might have problems, but Microsoft doesn't purposely make it a pain in the ass just to get a few laughs. And Linux had the nerve to say that Linux would crush MS. I can't wait until he's homeless on the streets going: "Man was I retarded to make such a crappy OS!" As for a motto for a Linux, I think this one would be perfect and I'm sure even the Linux users would agree: Linux: Not Ready for the Desktop. Guardian angel, heavenly friend, walk with me 'til the journey's end.

	Very true! (5.00 / 2) (#44)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 03:48:41 PM PST

	Microsoft doesn't purposely make it a pain in the ass just to get a few laughs Very true! Well said! In fact, they deliberately made it a pain in the ass so they could cash in on the after-sales support :)

	Reminds me of self-important WANKERS (5.00 / 2) (#162)
	by dmg on Fri Oct 5th, 2001 at 04:49:04 AM PST

	White Hat -- No life fat spotty pasty faced geek Grey Hat -- No life fat spotty pasty faced geek who has read 'pearl in a nutshell' Black Hat -- No life fat spotty pasty faced geek who knows a small amount of Unix (usually ancient sendmail exploits) You are all wannabees. There are only about 100 true hackers in the world. Most of them do not inhabit the United States of America. time to give a Newtonian demonstration - of a bullet, its mass and its acceleration. -- MC Hawking

	And DMG is one of them (5.00 / 2) (#166)
	by bc on Fri Oct 5th, 2001 at 06:29:12 AM PST

	I remember once he taught me about TweakUI, and how to hack my registry with it. That was amazing hacking. If only the linux people had the same skills and comprehensive knowledge. ♥, bc.

	You absolute damn MORON dumbhead no-life GEEK! (1.00 / 1) (#177)
	by Anonymous Reader on Fri Oct 5th, 2001 at 01:04:20 PM PST

	The Player's Handbook clearly states that Bards can't be Chaotic Good in alignment.

	Since you are so dismissive of wannabe hackers... (none / 0) (#161)
	by Anonymous Reader on Fri Oct 5th, 2001 at 04:19:52 AM PST

	...I can only assume that you are an accomplished hacker. As such, I recommend that you leave this sute and do not come back. Hackers and other criminals are not welcome here.

	Varies (none / 0) (#228)
	by dorward on Wed Oct 17th, 2001 at 12:27:42 AM PST

	Try irc.openprojects.net (#linpeople and #linuxhelp) there are some intelligent people there.

	Why Linux Apologists Exist (5.00 / 3) (#20)
	by Logical Analysis on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 12:11:58 PM PST

	You know, I think part of the problem is that people have a hard time believing that they are wrong. Take for instance your typical linux apologist: He's been working for MONTHS on just getting his operating system installed and his computer somewhat working again. He's spend HUNDREDS of dollars and WEEKS of reading books trying to figure out how to perform the various tasks required to run linux. (As you mentioned) Now this guy.. is he going to have the guts to look back on the last six months of his life and say "God, what a fucking waste of time. Now where'd I put my Windows 2000 install disc?" Nope. He's going to say "That was time well spent. Now I'm going to try to learn how to use Emacs/vi/XWindows/etc" then proceed to waste the next sixth months doing something he could have done in six minutes on Windows or Macintosh. People have a hard time criticizing themselves.. telling themselves they made a mistake and wasted time. So instead they convince themselves that they in fact are right and to reassure themselves of their rightness they go around and tell everyone else how great it is. Yet, in fact, they fucked up. So, Linux apologists, isn't it about time you be honest with yourself? (Looking forward the the next article)

	A Comment (5.00 / 1) (#31)
	by Anonymous Reader on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 01:54:12 PM PST

	I guess I better start off with what I've said in my previous posts regarding this topic... I am not a Linux fanatic and Linux is not ready for the average consumer's desktop. I am saying this to ward off the knee-jerk response of accusing me of being die-hard "Linux apologist". I use both Linux and Windows 2000 at home. I think they are both great operating systems and both have their merits. This discussion pertains to Linux, so I'll just stick to it. I admit, I've spent an inordinate amount of time famliarizing myself with the Linux operating system. To most people, the time I've spent would not be worth it in the least. However, computers are my hobby. I enjoy learning about them and Linux provides a great way to do that. As those of you who have tried it out have learned, Linux does not have a glossy user-friendly interface for all it's functions. You actually have to learn about the protocols being used and the commands being issued. This is the main reason why I say Linux is not for the average consumer. However, for me, this is perfect. This is the type of thing I am interested in. The kind of thing I would like to know about. Microsoft products do not provide an oppurtunity like this. Linux does. The average consumer does not want to spend time learning the ins and out of their computer system. It's damn near a requirement to do that to really familiarize yourself with the Linux operating environment. The average consumer shouldn't touch Linux becuase it really wasn't made with them in mind. - chuckx - Charles K. Lee II - - chuckx@cold-sun.com - - http://www.cold-sun.com -

	Six months (none / 0) (#33)
	by donkpunch on Tue Oct 2nd, 2001 at 01:55:53 PM PST

	Now this guy.. is he going to have the guts to look back on the last six months of his life and say "God, what a fucking waste of time. Now where'd I put my Windows 2000 install disc?" Probably not. It took me closer to 24 months. Yes, I wish I had that time back.

	my initial linux experience (none / 0) (#84)
	by Anonymous Reader on Wed Oct 3rd, 2001 at 08:22:41 AM PST

	Was somewhat different, I don't even remember what version it was, but it was slack with a 1.2.x? kernel if i remember right, it was a while back. Now don't get me wrong, I had no interest in getting any kind of shiny desktop thing, I was interested in the word 'linux' itself, as I was always envious of unix heads. So if I could get something installed that I could telnet to and try to do the basics, I would be a success. So, from complete ignorance to working bash prompt took me I think a few weeks (In reality, I only remember a few hours work tho, much was the 56k download and reading). And this was with doing everything wrong mind you, I'm nothing if not unlucky. From there I explored the various dirs and started "man"ing every filename I saw in /bin, etc. My goal was basic unix-like literacy. Sure, its more complicated now, there are so many more devices to support, etc, but Linux just installs nicer nowadays too. Redhat basically installed during a lapse of attention of mine when I was pondering how hard Redhat was going to be to install, and I looked back and the computer started doing all kind of crazy stuff, like giving me a KDE desktop, etc. But that doesn't mean you don't have to do a bit of research. For all the other wannabes reading, heres a heads up on the basic "compatibility list" for a Linux installation; if you don't have the needed resources (compatible hardware, suitable distro, reading ability, brain) then do like the other fellow said, just buy the t-shirt. 24 months? sheesh, I have a feeling thats not all that has been wasted here :-D Please guy, have mercy on yourself, hug your Windows CD. -- Anonymous user #42

	From Linux Zealot to Linux User (5.00 / 1) (#96)
	by donkpunch on Wed Oct 3rd, 2001 at 12:36:18 PM PST

	Going from Linux Zealot ("I'll never use another MS product again") to Linux User ("I'll use Linux for POSIX coding and general-purpose server") took about 24 months. No, it wasn't totally wasted. I did learn Berkely Sockets (and how WinSock is just ever-so-slightly different). I learned a lot about Unix in general. I learned to love no-nonsense programming editors and command-line compiler utilities. I also learned there are just some areas where Linux will probably NEVER compete with paid-license software. I spent 24 months waiting for a professional-level audio editing/mixing/MIDI sequencing package. That time was definitely wasted, but it was my fault, not "The Linux Community's" fault. There are just some packages that are insanely difficult or boring to code. Audio software falls into this category. There is not enough ROI to bother writing this software for a small community that will probably "warez" it the first chance they get. I certainly wouldn't do it, so I was a fool to think someone else would.

	Open source video editing (none / 0) (#135)
	by Anonymous Reader on Thu Oct 4th, 2001 at 02:01:25 PM PST

	I was interested in your comment because I do a little Video capturing and editing (not the same as audio editing I know) and all the programs I use are open source. They also all run only under Windows. My point is, this is the kind of thing where commercial software SHOULD have an advantage over open source and free software, but that just isn't the case. The open source stuff is good quality, not bloated, and has features the commercial stuff can't touch. If you're curious the programs and utilities I'm referring to are Virtual Dub, Huffyuv codec, AviSynth, VCDImager, VCDImagerEasy, cdrdao and possibly Tmpgenc. (Not sure of the licensing of that last one, but you can get it for free.)

	Hardware compatibility (none / 0) (#138)
	by donkpunch on Thu Oct 4th, 2001 at 03:04:38 PM PST

	The big difference here might be hardware. Pro audio and sequencing hardware is, by and large, only marginally supported by Linux. Could I have gotten something to work with a regular Soundblaster? Of course, but the sound quality would be completely unacceptable. I'd just as soon record with my son's Fisher Price cassette tape deck. Beyond that, the last time I checked (several months ago) there were two different sound driver models still in use (OSS and kernel mods, IIRC). Alan Cox had been leading the kernel-level efforts to support sound/MIDI but he apparently either got bored or frustrated and simply stopped. I even went as far as getting some of his old kernel patch code and tweaking it to run on a newer kernel. The new OSS system didn't support any of my (not uncommon) hardware at all. I could buy an OSS-supported card, but it would mean taking a hit in audio quality. I didn't spend good money on quality AD converters and shielded electronics just to downgrade to a sound card meant for bitchin' Quake explosions. And this, more than anything else, demonstrated to me that the open source model has some significant weaknesses. Namely, developers who simply stop work because they lose interest and redundant incompatible systems that do the same thing (cough KDE/Gnome cough). I know, I know -- "You're a programmer. Scratch that itch." Well, my main "itch" is making music, not writing driver code that allows me to make music. I choose to spend my money on a Microsoft back scratcher.

	Donk (none / 0) (#168)
	by TheReverand on Fri Oct 5th, 2001 at 06:51:15 AM PST

	You check your USian pie account? I emailed you there a bit ago.