Linked by Thom "Slakje" Holwerda on Sun 27th Jul 2003 19:04 UTC
Misinterpreted. I think that is about the best word around to describe the reactions to my previous article. Whether it has been misinterpreted due to people only reading what they want to read, due to an unclear choice of words on my behalf, or other factors, I am going to try it again. I will try to explain my position, again. Now, more stable, the code has been rewritten from scratch!
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
The author writes...
" But for some (or a lot, I do not know) people, Linux has not been all that good. And to dismiss those people by saying "They should read a manual", "They will learn it, over time" and so on,..."
But this is almost exactly what many (not all) Windows enthusiasts say when one points out a Windows installation that boots slowly, or crashes often. It's always, "well, you installed it wrong" "your hardware is no good" "you have to know what you are doing".
This is why I claim that Window's alledged hardware compatibility and esse of installation are myths. Why is it the on the very same computer Windows chokes on configuring a video card, printer, scanner, dsl internet connection when Knoppix does not? Using the same logic as the author "...Well, if I find those things annoying, uneasy, or just plain stupid, then sure as a rock there are people who agree with me..." if I find these problems with Windows, then sure as a rock there are people who agree with me.
The problem here is that the author takes generalities and drews conclusions from them (something that is done by many of all persuasions). From the author's second article...
"...I know for sure that if I would ask some of my computer-illiterate friends to install both Windows and Linux, they would say that Windows was easier to install. So I am talking about the newbie here..."
That may be, but do your friends represent a random sample? Maybe they do, maybe they do not. I can show a group of people with little computer systems knowledge that have had nothing but trouble installing Windows XP and getting it to work properly. I can tell you that when the operating system is unable to configure your hardware (as Windows XP was for mine), the operating system that does do it without asking any questions (Knoppix) is far easier to install. But this is not enough to conclude that one is universally easy to install than the other.
This is not to suggest that Linux is better than Windows. Just that this author has stumbled into a disseration that exhibits the very problems that the author objects to. Just substitute lauding features of Windows (that are not universally appreaciated or experienced) instead of features of Linux (that are not universally appreaciated or experienced).
In attempting to display the faults in the evidence of superiority of Linux by its proponents, the author has provided the equivalent for an alternative operating system (although unintentionally). But maybe that was the point in the first place. Illustrate obsurdity by being obsurd.