[clue-tech] Mephis linux

[David L. Willson]

OK Nate, I'm all inflamed over your use of the word "parasite" in reference to my favorite Free OS (Linux) and my favorite IT ecosystem (FLOSS), which implies that my favorite Free Collaboration Suite (Zimbra) is also a "parasite", and I'm completely annoyed at your implication that OS X is some sort of level that we in the Free software community have yet to attain to.  So, I'll ask you directly:  Since Zimbra and OpenFiler aren't your idea of better, and since Linux isn't, and since OS X is, what the ~Heck~ are you using for criterion?  I've ~used~ MacOS X.  Here are my criterion for calling it crap: It's over-priced, feature-limited, a non-Free copy of a Free OS (BSD), less stable than Linux, less robust than Linux, harder to deploy than Linux, less well-documented than Linux, and it has much less available software than Linux.  We must have way different criterion.

Referring to my other post:  What is your proposed solution to Linux's "problem", and what are you personally doing to hasten it's arrival?  I want to know what your direction would be, if you were Mark Shuttleworth or me.  This is, after all, a Linux technical list, and you're on it by choice...  so, what is it that you want out of Linux and what are you doing to make it happen?

----- Original Message -----
From: "Nate Duehr" <nate at natetech.com>
To: "CLUE tech" <clue-tech at cluedenver.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2008 12:51:24 PM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain
Subject: Re: [clue-tech] Mephis linux

David L. Willson wrote:

>  - Not sure what you're saying here.  Linux and FLOSS are growing.  

I guess what I'm saying is that Linux and FLOSS are growing -- sure... 
but by copy-catting better software produced by the commercial ventures. 
  That's not good growth, that's just being a parasite.

I don't know that copying other products poorly is in any way a good 
sign that Linux is HEALTHY, just that it's growing.

Growth != Quality.  Too bad Wall Street doesn't understand that very 
well.  (Makes it easier to game Wall Street, though.)

There's always room for lower-quality, cheaper stuff in any market.

I'd LIKE to see BETTER software quality over time, not the death of 
commercial software and it's replacement by lower-quality Free software.

Other things can die or not die on their own merits.  It's better for 
Linux, in fact, if other things live.  Variety and competition breed 
core standards and true innovation.  Only Microsoft is stupid enough to 
think that destruction of the competition is a good thing, and I hope 
they're coming slowly around on that point.

Most FLOSS folk are also out for "destruction of the closed-source 
competition", and they're pretty vocal about it.

That's not any more healthy than MS wanting to see FLOSS die.

>  - So, you never hear, "Is there anything free/Free/OpenSource/GPL that does that?"  I do.  Pretty often in fact, but then, I'm listening, because I'm a Free software enthusiast, and I am always building my software and human relationships from that "yes, plenty" perspective.

I hear it from admins but not from desktop users.  Maybe I'm just 
hanging with people caught in the MS "Borg Cube" or something.

My contention continues to be that if there were something *so much 
better* than MS or Apple's offerings out there -- there'd be no need for 
a grassroots movement to get people to switch to Linux, or Installfests, 
or any of it.

If it was truly better software, the average computer user would just 
"be there" running Linux already by now.

People find out pretty fast via word of mouth when a particular piece of 
software does something they want to do, and does it better/cheaper than 
someone else's.

They usually put the "better" metric higher than the "cheaper" metric, 
as evidenced by Apple's sales numbers since OSX came out.  Apple stuff 
isn't cheap, by any stretch of the imagination.

Nate
_______________________________________________
clue-tech mailing list
clue-tech at cluedenver.org
http://www.cluedenver.org/mailman/listinfo/clue-tech