Linux Genuine Advantage

[Technoid]

Check it out

http://www.linuxgenuineadvantage.org

[MultimediaMan]

Actually, I find Linux less useful than Windows, on many levels.

[Jessterw]

Ah but the zealots don't take that into consideration. Their sole selling point is that it is 'free' and not plagued by security issues, choosing to ignore the fact that, at best, 90% of the software available for Linux is utter crap that is so far from intuitive or comprehensive that it makes using the shell your sanest option.

There have been some major improvements, but once you get outside a few primary applications, it's a horrible experience (there are obviously exceptions as with all things). One of the main companies that has made great strides in making Linux and OSS usable is Novell and now the FOSS zealots are attempting to stop them from distributing the very OS they are actively trying to improve. So yeah, there's freedom as long as it's by their rules.

[Technoid]

The funny thing is that the Windows zealots and the mac zealots sounds just like the linux zealots

[az]

I must be so lucky to not be a zealot!

[Sasq]

I admit there are times i evangelizise osx.
simple reason, it works, and in general it has the best of both worlds - a good BSD base, with someone actually getting paid to make it all work.

the whole is linux ready for the desktop thing irks me.

today i sat two seperate friends through runing AV software on their windows boxes, and explaining what quarantine is.
I don't think windows is ready for the desktop either.

That said, Linux itself is ready for the desktop, pity all the applications that go with it suck. - see JW's post above for better detail.

Hell even OSX is not 'ready' for the dekstop, but IMHO its the most ready of a bad bunch.

[TransformX]

I must be so lucky to not be a zealot!

Opera? (if in doubt, see your sig )

[az]

I was a zealot once, I'm not anymore. Opera is still a good browser, but now Firefox is out and it's equally good (but different). Opera is still the browser I use and know and like more (because I'm used to it), so I advertise it (which I wouldn't do if it got enough press and/or market share), but I'll admit its shortcomigs, I'll never say it's perfect, I freely admit that it's certainly not the best for everyone - but it is for me, and I don't think saying so makes me a zealot.

(Yes, I saw your smilie )

[Jessterw]

The funny thing is that the Windows zealots and the mac zealots sounds just like the linux zealots

It's not the platform zealots that bother me, it's the FOSS zealots that lay claim to Linux that do. Platform (or OS if you will) zealots are simply pretentious and assume they know what OS and set of applications are best for you. FOSS zealots on the other-hand do that and more, not the least of which is push their 'religion' on you. There are no gray areas with them, no concessions to the 'opposing' sides.

Sadly they are the ones driving the promotion of Linux by taking moderate stances and then shifting into ideological over-drive.

[Gurm]

Linux isn't even REALLY ready for the Enterprise, much less the desktop!

We bought a customer a nice new HP Proliant with SATA Raid. The only Linux OS supported? Red Hat Enterprise 4. Ok, fine, so we bought it. And downloaded all 6 CD's. Using WINDOWS. They ship 'em as ISO's.

Installed it... NO hardware support. Not for the RAID, not for the NIC, nothing. Huh?

Call up HP, they say that we should downgrade to an older version of the OS. Hmm, really? Ok, I'll give it a shot. Yet another 6-CD download later (under Windows)... ooh look it supports the SATA RAID! But... not... the... NIC.

Call HP back. "Oh yes, you have to compile the NIC drivers!"

"How shall I get the NIC drivers onto the machine?"

"Download them from our website!"

"How, since I have... no... NIC!??"

So I download them, using WINDOWS, to a thumb drive. Move over to the other machine and prepare to follow the 20-page (no lie!) instruction manual for compiling and installing them... only to find out that NONE of the software prerequisites are installed. You need the kernel source, apparently. Fine, I'll download TWO MORE CD's (under windows!), and re-run the ENTIRE INSTALL, to get that.

Hours later... the install instructions don't work. However, someone on the web (which I surfed to with Windows) has made shorter, easier instructions that ALSO don't work. AWESOME! But the shorter, easier ones I can see the error in, and quickly fix it and compile the drivers...

Only to discover that, due to some glitch EITHER in the 2-revisions-old version of the OS or in the homecooked NIC drivers... that the networking is HOPELESSLY BROKEN. Can't route outside its local network.

Spent WEEKS researching that point and FINALLY discovered that - and again I'm unsure if I should blame the quite old OS revision or the bad NIC drivers - I must explicitly set PEERDNS=NO in one of the 20 network config files, NONE of which are accessible through the GUI. It's not enough to delete the PEERDNS=YES (which, mind you, isn't even SET in the newer version of the OS), you have to explicitly deny it.

Then it worked.

On the most well-supported server machines on the planet, Linux is a PHENOMENAL failure. I've set up Linux on hundreds of boxes, but every time I have to put it on a server I cringe unless I _KNOW_ that the hardware is supported natively.

[DGhost]

Suprisingly, I think that Linux, as a base, was more ready for the desktop back in 2000. Sadly, the ****tards have spent more time rewriting everything from scratch (because it's better this way!) than addressing any of the real issues.

Thats why I love FreeBSD. Generally speaking, it does work as a base. Either it works out of box or you are probably never going to get it to work. It's awesome. And from there, it's all up to you. But, sadly, it has the same issues that Unix and the whole GNU crowd has had for years - the interface still sucks.

Oh well...

[Jessterw]

Well to be fair Windows has the same issues, but you're right, it can be far worse with Linux. What makes it all the worse is that Red Hat is supposed to be THE choice for the enterprise and servers, but it's so horribly broken at times even on supposedly supported hardware (Dan could write volumes about his 'love' for RH ) that it can certainly make one wonder about the state of Linux as even a server OS.

Linux can be an awesomely efficient server OS depending on what type of server you intend to use it for.

Going back to what Dan was saying, there are no current operating systems that are truly ready for the desktop (or the enterprise). The failure rate and non-user friendly interfaces of every software package I've ever used are so horrible that these products could never exist in damn near any other market, consumer or otherwise.

Given the very nature of software this is not likely to change any time soon.

Thats why I love FreeBSD. Generally speaking, it does work as a base. Either it works out of box or you are probably never going to get it to work. It's awesome. And from there, it's all up to you. But, sadly, it has the same issues that Unix and the whole GNU crowd has had for years - the interface still sucks.

Big BSD fan here as well. What I find most amusing is that Apple (NeXT) was able to take a BSD-base and place, whether you like it or not, a GUI on top that is far more user-friendly than anything that was coming from the *nix camp for a long while. The reason is rather simple, it's not been until recently that *nix developers have placed any real importance on good UI.

[Sasq]

(Dan could write volumes about his 'love' for RH )

Monday morning, I am feeling happy, I have to go to a customers on Thursday, to convince samba to work correctly on their RHES4 server.
That is as far as I will go for now, I am feeling rather happy this morning.

[DGhost]

Oh, I hate redhat. I've always hated redhat. In fact, back in 98, i was spreading all kinds of crap about how Redhat would be the doom of Linux. In fact, I think most of it has come true.

I remember trying to install one of the 5.x's to see how it held up against whatever the slackware distro at the time was (3.something, I think). It was garbage then. It still is garbage. And it made me cringe when Mandrake forked me off, became even more unstable, and then became popular.

I honestly think that RPM is one of the worst mistakes ever. I have a box that I will have to wipe and reload in order to upgrade any of the software. Either that or I just delete the files and upgrade it regardless of what RPM thinks is going on (very dangerous).

The one thing I will say about Enterprise software and why it sucks is because it's written by geeks for geeks. It's not designed as an end user solution (**** you oracle!). Or the front end is designed by a tiny company for their specific solution. It's crap - and it all comes down to the development model.

Thankfully, most SBS software isn't too bad.

And yes, I agree that it was perhaps Apples best feature. Unfortunately, it looks like Apple is really trying to get away from the BSD crowd which is prolly going to hurt it in the long run. I've thought about pick up a Mac on several occasions to be able to do *NIX work again. And then I usually have to do linux server work and remember why I got away from it in the first place.