An interview was recently done with Rickford Grant, the author of “Linux for Non-Geeks” and the new “Linux Made Easy”. Grant is outspoken in his opinions and offers a number of unique views on topics as diverse as Windows Vista, desktop Linux, GNOME vs. KDE, and lots more. Part of the interview is spent talking about his new book but the bulk of the interview is a discussion of his views on pertinent topics and news.
“From a Linux (or even Mac) user’s standpoint, it is also to everyone’s benefit that Windows remain as the king of the desktop. By being the dominant force in the market, Windows stands as the ultimate target for those interested in causing digital mischief. Linux and Mac OS are virtually virus free primarily because the great behemoth, Windows, is there to take the incoming.”
i have been saying this for years. i hope that “normal” people stick with windows. its the operating system i enjoy the least, and as long as the ignorant masses stay there, infantile virus writers wont target the platforms i do enjoy using. which is the major reason i disagree with this…
“In a strange sense, it is its open-source heritage and the desire of most distro creators to keep things in line with that heritage. Users these days expect to be able to rip and encode MP3s, and watch Windows Media streams and encrypted DVDs. It is impossible to keep things open source while providing these capabilities and yet stay legal. And many end users are unconcerned with such noble desires. The solution is simple enough, though. Many major distros, Xandros included, provide free and for-sale versions of their products. If such companies were to include the necessary licensed elements needed to meet the average users expectations in their for-sale versions, and leave them out of their free versions, everyone could be satisfied… and legal.”
why exactly do linux users want those kind of “average” users? the only reason xandros exists, and continues to exist, is because of ethical geeks who believe in the ideals of open source. why would we want non ethical, computer illiterate users who dont care about such “noble desires”? if it werent for those noble desires, companies like xandros wouldnt have anyone to get their free lunch from, the least they could do is promote the ideals that make their existance possible. instead, they capitulate to make a buck, and have a detrimental overall effect for users of the platform. if you want a good os, and dont care about ethics, buy a mac. if you dont care about the quality of your os and want to save money, buy a windows box. if you want to be a part of a community driven operating system thats created by geeks for other geeks, use linux. its that simple.
why exactly do linux users want those kind of “average” users? the only reason xandros exists, and continues to exist, is because of ethical geeks who believe in the ideals of open source. why would we want non ethical, computer illiterate users who dont care about such “noble desires”?
Why would a believer want to convert a non-believer? Why would a person who thinks herself/himself as an ethical person want to change the views of those who she/he thinks are non-ethical?
Because some of us think we’re all in the same boat and it doesn’t make any sense that we’re rowing in different directions???
Why would a believer want to convert a non-believer? Why would a person who thinks herself/himself as an ethical person want to change the views of those who she/he thinks are non-ethical?
Because some of us think we’re all in the same boat and it doesn’t make any sense that we’re rowing in different directions???
I dont have a problem with evangelising linux, and i dont have a problem with windows switchers who want to learn, and are willing to give something back.
the problem with something like xandros is it tends to draw the other kind, the ones youll see insulting developers on mailing lists because they wont capitulate to demands, the ones that dont give a crap about software freedom, only that it doesnt cost them anything, and the ones who will execute a binary, because an email says the sender loves them, and will steadfastly refuse to be educated. the first kind is just offensive, and does nothing but build up a general resentment for idiot users. you can see how this has affected the gnome project for example, they will just not do something if all they get is demands. the second kind is just looking for a free lunch, and will never do anything to contribute back to the community. the last shouldnt really use anything but macs, and is the primary target of virii/malware writers.
i used to think like you, but spend enough time seeing the kind of crap that goes on on message boards, irc channels, newsgroups, and mailing lists, and you may change your mind too. its not really that im an elitist or anything, its that these users could find something better for them elsewere, and their effect on the community is actually detrimental.
” it is also to everyone’s benefit that Windows remain as the king of the desktop… Windows stands as the ultimate target for those interested in causing digital mischief. ”
By wich I presume is meant:
“It is to MY benefit, as a Linux user, that stupid users take all the flak and *I* get to have a secure system. F’K ’em all, I’m secure, Jack”
pretty much. i would say its more along the lines of the assumption that using an os with a small marketshare is a bad thing. it definately has its advantages.
and just because i dont have as bad a time as a windows user, doesnt mean my inbox doesnt get flooded or i dont get DDoSd when a new worm comes out by windows zombies.
Why would he waste his time messing around with crap like linux on the desktop. And who would want to be associated with an operating system that has users like the asshole first poster. He should’ve just gone back to OSX
The first poster epitomizes the absolute insane morons that make up a significant portion of the linux user base.
Any brain damaged fool that thinks they have “noble desires” because they use linux should do the world and themselves a favor and kill themselves. No wonder linux on the desktop failed. Nobody wants to be associated with crazy people that think like that.
“The first poster epitomizes the absolute insane morons that make up a significant portion of the linux user base.”
Please care to cite some examples.
“Any brain damaged fool that thinks they have “noble desires” because they use linux should do the world and themselves a favor and kill themselves ”
Please reference the “noble desires”? You make no references and hurl insults. How about discussion, using rational and logic.
“No wonder linux on the desktop failed. Nobody wants to be associated with crazy people that think like that.”
Please show a market consensus on where Linux on the desktop has failed? Or Unix on the desktop? As for “crazy people”, I see a person who makes accusations but offers no proof. Who is the crazy person?
Please care to cite some examples.
If you would have read the first poster’s comments then you would have seen the clear insansity.
I’d better see some sanctions from the admins for barkley’s comment.
I’d better see some sanctions from the admins for barkley’s comment.
Sanctions? Haha loser boy.
Read the philosophy of the FSF. Using linux doesnt mean you have noble desires. Writing or contributing to applications under the GPL means that you buy into at least some of what stallman says, if you do you are writing for ethical purposes. Anyone who benefits from the GPL is directly benefiting from software written for those reasons, which have to do with ethics rather then personal gain.
I would much rather be associated with people like that then the average windows user.
Im sorry if I came off as an asshole, but its true. Look at the amount of piracy on the windows platform, look at the amount of completely computer illiterate users. Look at the unethical and illegal business practices of microsoft, look at the amount of inconsistancies, and downright bad ideas that are all over the place in the os. Im not saying that all windows users are theiving idiots, im saying that most thieving idiots use windows, and I have no desire whatsoever to see them switch to linux. I would welcome a rational discussion on the subject, but aparently Im a moronic asshole who should do the world a favor and kill himself. I think barkly proved my point.
Using linux doesnt mean you have noble desires. Writing or contributing to applications under the GPL means that you buy into at least some of what stallman says, if you do you are writing for ethical purposes
So typical of assholes like you. It’s not Linux that is noble, it’s the GPL. Not only that, but if you release some code under the GPL then you must buy into Stallman’s propaganda.
Anyone who benefits from the GPL is directly benefiting from software written for those reasons, which have to do with ethics rather then personal gain.
And once again we get these mental cases that think some altruistic goal is the reason that people write open source over some “personal gain”. It’s about scratching an itch for one’s self. Yeah, sorry to burst your touchy-feely, imaginary bubble of how the world works in your imagination.
Look at the amount of piracy on the windows platform,
Look at all those GNU assholes that pirate mp3s and movies. I wouldn’t want to hang around those people.
look at the amount of completely computer illiterate users
What, you don’t the internals of your microwave? You are a complete moron.
Look at the unethical and illegal business practices of microsoft,
Look at the unethical practices of an asshole like Richard Stallman.
look at the amount of inconsistancies, and downright bad ideas that are all over the place in the os.
Look at all the bad ideas in all that crap GNU, Gnome, KDE, and Linux software.
im saying that most thieving idiots use windows, and I have no desire whatsoever to see them switch to linux.
Most rational people don’t want to be associated with morons that are part of a cult that is revolved around a software license.
I would welcome a rational discussion on the subject,
You are incapable of rational thought.
So typical of assholes like you. It’s not Linux that is noble, it’s the GPL. Not only that, but if you release some code under the GPL then you must buy into Stallman’s propaganda.
again with the name calling. the gpl is a restrictive liscence, and its restrictive for a reason. that reason is ethical, not practical. if you release code under the gpl, chances are you at least partially agree with his reasoning. if you dont, it would be total charity work, which is still altruistic.
And once again we get these mental cases that think some altruistic goal is the reason that people write open source over some “personal gain”. It’s about scratching an itch for one’s self. Yeah, sorry to burst your touchy-feely, imaginary bubble of how the world works in your imagination.
scratching your own itch will determine what you work on. if you want to write an app, but dont want to totally give up your control over the code (which the gpl more or less requires), then why gpl it? that would make no sense at all. better to do shareware, where you at least have a chance in hell of getting a few bucks. even freeware gives you the oppertunity of changing your mind in the future. its not easy to sell something which anyone has the right to copy, modify, and resell.read the fsf website, they wrote the gpl and a great many of the tools that are used pretty much across the board in linux. aparently you dont know where free software comes from, im sure it would be an enlightening experience.
Look at all those GNU assholes that pirate mp3s and movies. I wouldn’t want to hang around those people.
GNU is written by the FSF, which as ive mentioned several times already, is very big on ethics. i would be quite amazed of high piracy rates amoung people like richard stallman, who wrote quite a bit of gnu. the man gave up quite the career for his ideals. while he may be an asshole, he most definately is not a pirate. but ignorance is aparent in everything you write, generally those who resort to slurs are just trying to hide the weakness of their argument, or a lack of knowledge.
What, you don’t the internals of your microwave? You are a complete moron.
so you are implying that the average windows user knows more about computers then the average linux user? and calling me a moron? linux is a hacker os, windows most definately is not.
Look at the unethical practices of an asshole like Richard Stallman.
such as?
Look at all the bad ideas in all that crap GNU, Gnome, KDE, and Linux software.
such as? if you want, i can give you several dozen things that make absolutely no sense in windows off the top of my head, but this is getting fairly far from the main points in my argument.
Most rational people don’t want to be associated with morons that are part of a cult that is revolved around a software license.
let me guess, youre an american, right?
You are incapable of rational thought.
…says the guy who has yet to say anything beyond “UR STUPID,STFU LOL” in various forms.
“why exactly do linux users want those kind of “average” users? the only reason xandros exists, and continues to exist, is because of ethical geeks who believe in the ideals of open source. why would we want non ethical, computer illiterate users who dont care about such “noble desires”?”
The problem you end up with is this. You have some friend or customer who in the nature of his/her work does a lot of online banking, or writes collaboratively and so swaps files a lot with other people. You are worried about the phone call at 11pm that starts with ‘something funny is happening’ – to my bank account, to my book, whatever. You look through what it will take for them to keep Windows secure on Broadband. But they are hundreds of miles away, you see them once a month or so, and you doubt they can or will do it themselves. I am talking people who really do not know how to navigate a file system or set up a printer, but are perfectly good novelists or historians or marketing consultants or mothers of families.
So you look around for a version of Linux they can use with minimal support from you. You don’t see why they should pay the price for a mac, or throw out their existing hardware for it. Money is a real factor for them.
You end up with Suse, or perhaps Mandriva, or Xandros, and you and they are very grateful that it exists, and you get called once a month or so for them to find out how to do various things in OO. You all sleep better, they are several hundred better off than with a Mac, which matters to them.
Don’t knock it.
see, this is what i meant by rational discussion 😉
While I do see your point, I still dont think linux would be the best solution. You would end up being their administrator, someone like that has enough problems in windows, linux would just stop them flat. Now, if we are talking about a pc for grandma so she can check her email and visit cnn.com, you definately have a point. but she isnt exactly putting her box through the paces at even the level an “average” user of windows would.
Honestly, people who cant, and dont want to, administer their desktops should be using macs, because on a mac, you really dont need an administrator. it would be better for them, and less hassle for the friends who get shanghaid into becomming support staff.
We’ve all allowed ourselves to be taken a little off track by a cheesy flamefest, It’s time to get back to the interview.
Rickford Grant is the author of one of my favorite tech books (Linux For Non-Geeks). I’ve often referenced his book when trying to explain various tasks to newbies (I think it is sometimes hard to keep answers simple when many GNU/Linux users have such a massive depth of knowledge). That said I would like to throw out some of my own opinions on various subjects where I disagree with Mr. Grant.
The first one is on security. Mr. Grant says:
From a Linux (or even Mac) user’s standpoint, it is also to everyone’s benefit that Windows remain as the king of the desktop. By being the dominant force in the market, Windows stands as the ultimate target for those interested in causing digital mischief. Linux and Mac OS are virtually virus free primarily because the great behemoth, Windows, is there to take the incoming.
Part of the problem with that statement is that it ignores the fact that MS Windows has a less secure design, and that Linux and OS X will never be as susceptible to viriii and other maladies as MS Windows even if OS X and Linux were to each have 40% of the desktop market and MS only 20%. A good example of this is IIS and Apache. Apache on Linux and BSD is much more prevelant on the internet then IIS on MS Windows and yet the majority of serious trojans, virii, and worms will only affect IIS and not Apache.
On Mr. Grants comparison of Ubuntu and Fedora he said:
I know here is a lot of hoopla out there right now about Ubuntu, and I admit that it is quite attractive in name, looks and operation, but I don’t see that it is any easier or friendlier than Fedora, which is, if your willing to do a slight bit of geeking around, pretty easy in its own right.
Now I know Mr. Grant did not dwell on this subject, but I wanted to point out a couple of things here.
sudo apt-get dist-upgrade
This command has always worked correctly for me so far in Ubuntu (please go back to the various forums and read about all the upgrade nightmares people had when moving from Fedora Core 2 to 3 and again the same nightmare to Core 4). Plus the fact that it has a live distro version is also a nice touch that Fedora lacks. Oh, and did I mention about the availability of profesionally burned disks for free direct from Ubuntu!
I also wanted to comment on his GNOME vs. KDE statement. He said:
It depends on what time of day you ask me, as I like them both. I do like the emblems you can place on folders in GNOME, though, as they make things so much more meaningful, easy-to-deal-with, and… attractive. I can’t help but feel, and I mean that in the sensory sense, that KDE took more styling and design cues from Windows, while GNOME took more from Mac OS 8 and 9, with both improving on the originals in the process. In that sense, I suppose which is better depends on from which OS world you arrived. I’d give the nod to KDE in terms of system control and to GNOME in terms of file handling and cosmetic customization.
Now I was primarily a KDE user for several years and created original artwork for them, etc.; but, I’ve changed my preference. As a power user that doesn’t need a pretty desktop, I like Xfce, but for new users I currently recommend GNOME. KDE is pretty, but has to many bloated toolbars, and confusing configurations. Xfce lacks to many things a user is used to (desktop icons), and a sensible file browser (Thunar looks hopeful). GNOME’s strict adherence to its Human Interface Guidelines has made it the most intuitive and the easiest to configure sensibly. This is why the last several installs I did for others involved the GNOME desktop, and also why my hobby distro that I’m building (just to know how to build a distro) is also based on GNOME (specifically GNOME 2.12).
Lot’s of people are curious about Linux, but they’re not necessarily motivated or secure enough to give it a try. If it is already sitting there on their hard disks, then there is little reason for such folks to not give it a go.
The problem with this statement is that we are still several years away from walking into Best Buy or Walmart and seeing Linux running on a computer. No one is going to buy a computer with Linux preinstalled unless they already use it. The best way to show off how good Linux is to nonusers right now is with tools like Live CDs (XandrOS and Fedora both lack this).
I still think Rickford Grant is a great author, LFNG is proof of that, but I am not likely to recommend his new book, Linux Made Easy, to users as I don’t care for XandrOS and its overly customized KDE.