Linked by Mike Reed on Tue 22nd Apr 2003 19:02 UTC
Red Hat I keep reading all these tales of woe of people having bad experiences with Linux. Sure, I've had my own bad experiences, across many an OS, but just lately I've been running a Red Hat Linux 9 desktop full-time at home and have yet to run into any major issue. What follows is an overview of my personal experiences with Linux. But first, a bit about me.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
serious problems with article
by stopdabombing on Tue 22nd Apr 2003 23:41 UTC

The most serious problem is that really, in essence, all it can say is "linux on a desktop in the form of RH 9 works for me" - which is a universe of one single person. I'd rather read a review that tries to evaluate (_tries_), how well it may suit greater number of people.

Case in point - Mike Reed wrote:

Q: What about typing a letter, writing my latest screenplay or doing some spreadsheet sums?
A: OpenOfficeOrg is good enough for me.


HELLOOOOO?????!!!!! WTF?? For you - who CARES! Because it absolutely is NOT good enough for me! As a matter of fact, I have looked at all the linux programs available for screenplay writing, and they all suck rocks. Can you use OpenOfficeOrg to write a screenplay? Ummm, can you use a teaspoon to empty the ocean? Sure you _can_, but who would want to? The whole point of screen-writing software, such as Final Draft or Screenwriter 2000, is that it has powerful built-in features which you simply cannot duplicate by configuring ordinary word-processing programs. And it makes a HUGE difference productivity-wise. As a matter of fact, OpenOfficeOrg is as useful as a screen-writing tool as notepad is for writing complex workflow charts.

With this single observation, the author just completely lost any credibility in my eyes. Clearly, he is not a power user of screen-writing software, but none-the-less says OO is "good enough" for him - which says more about him as a screenwriter than about how good OO is for the task. A man who has so little understanding or use for the proper tools that he cannot utilize them, clearly is not a man who is serious or competent about the task.

And if that is so for this case, how do we know that this is not so for every other use he has described? For that matter, his vague statements about CD burning are also disturbing to a power user (find me ONE program in linux that even comes close to Nero Burning).

But then of course the disclaimer is "but for _ME_ it is good enough" - well, why not say: my needs are ridiculously tiny in many areas, and guess what, linux meets them just fine! LOL! And how is that instructive? Well here's a newsflash, there's a guy down the street who finds a Barbie toy computer quite adequate for his needs - of course, he only has a 3-rd grade education, but hey, FOR HIS NEEDS, Barbie computer is just fine! And what do we get out of hearing THAT?

If the author was a SERIOUS user of screenplay-writing software, and found linux meeting his needs, well, that would be BIG NEWS (and so for the rest of his list, CD burning etc.). But as it stands, the news that linux meets his Barbie needs is no news at all. Who cares. Worthless article.