[linux-elitists] How to kill Linux

Rob McGee list+Elite@nodns4.us
Wed Feb 23 15:39:50 PST 2005


On Wednesday 23 February 2005 16:49, Andrew Kohlsmith wrote:
> http://www.pcmag.com/print_article2/0,2533,a=146348,00.asp

[ "MS Linux" theories ]

> While I don't think this will kill Linux in any way shape or form, I

Absurd. My first thought is that this is written by someone who has 
never really used Linux.

I admit I've never had the displeasure of installing XP or subsequent, 
but I have done a couple of 2000's. Using *older* hardware than the OS, 
the Windows pipe dream of "plug-and-play" is a joke.

My laptop: Win2000-era; /dev/wife's: Win98/NT-era. She installed 2000,  
I installed Linux. Everything ... USB, PCMCIA ... plug and play for me. 
Not for her. The stupid driver wizard pops up. She couldn't get an old 
Lucent Orinoco WNIC to work! Couldn't exactly download a driver with no 
network connectivity.

I traded her for the Linksys (also Orinoco) for which we had the CD. 
Plug and play. I was up on the other NIC in seconds.

USB, same thing. I plug it in and it works. She plugs it in and gets  
the stupid wizard.

> thought the discussion it might generate here would be interesting. 
> With the exception of some really cheap and/or really esoteric
> hardware, I find hardware support on Linux adequate, if not plain old
> acceptable.

It might lag a bit behind on the calendar, for example, speaking of 
wireless NIC's, Linux was a bit weak at the time that Win2000 CD was 
mastered. Now it's strong, even stronger than Windows.

> From the article:
>
> "The idea here would be to cut the driver layer out of Windows and
> attach it to Linux directly. This would become MS-Linux. If Microsoft
> actually produced an MS-Linux that was the standard Linux attached to
> the driver layer of Windows, giving users full Plug and Play (PnP)
> support of all their peripherals, nobody would buy any other Linux on
> the market.

This has to be the stupidest thing in the whole article. I know enough 
about MS to know their "MS Linux" would be the worst distro ever.

Like I told an MCI sales rep: "If MCI was the last telecommunications 
company in the world, we'd start using tin cans with string."

If MS produced a Linux, and if it was the only OS available to me, I'd 
revert to pencil and paper and an abacus.

GAFC, Dvorak!

Okay, let's take this back a bit to be fair. First, when he said 
"nobody" I'm sure he meant "none of the Clueless masses, the cattle of 
the computing world." And in that he might be right ... those who have 
been deluded by FUD all this time are likely to continue to believe 
FUD.

Also as I hinted, it's not really fair to compare Linux 2.6.10 with 
Win2000, for driver support. There have been 4 extra years of 
development for Linux.

But ... that is an issue itself. GNU/Linux is moving rapidly. Despite 
the relatively small size of the community and its lack of real 
funding, we're moving faster than Windows ever did or ever will.

I am just totally unimpressed with the Emperor's clothes. I bet the 
latest crop of luser-friendly distros is better than anything MS ever 
dredged up.

What's all the fuss?

I did get a look around at OS X, and yes, that's a well-thought-out UI. 
Not for me, but I can see that it's good.
-- 
    Rob - /dev/rob0



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list