To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
First thank you for answering, second I apologize I had indeed not read your article.
Articles questioning the fitness of Linux for a particular purpose have become tiresome and annoying. They usually focus on needs of a specific user (the author, mostly) and how Linux fails to provide; Usually coupled to a comparison to OS X or Windows. It's not so much how or why they were written, but rather the way in which they are presented.
After reading your article, I admit I failed to follow my own advice "Don't just assume." :-) It wasn't really a "Linux disappointed me" article, but I have the impression you only had a few points to make:
1. Linux is only "user-friendly" if the user is a "geek" because mostly geeks use Linux and only develop software they need.
2. Complex tasks will not be easy at first (or ever).
3. Sometimes you have to learn/train to be good at a task
4. People are lazy and complain a lot.
I don't see anything to discuss here, though. To me these are very obvious observations about Life in general (2, 3, 4) and the FOSS culture (1).
Still, I question it being presented here in this way. You seek some form of communication and discussion, but I'm not so sure whether this is the right place or not. A mailing list or forum would be a much better place to start a discussion.




Member since:
1997-10-01
I said that one reason that Linux is the way that it is (and I don't say that it's bad at all -- in fact, the gist of my conclusion about Linux is "Linux makes a very powerful tool, and its flexibility and stability can even make it a superior tool. But Linux suffers from the same problems as Windows when it comes to obscure or poorly-built hardware or software, and problems with troubleshooting and advanced configuration can likewise be difficult for non-expert users."
I'm not sure that you read my article, because I really don't think it's a rant.