Website review: What if Microsoft Ran an Official W...
Zalmoxsis discovered this in Linux/Unix
•1 reviews since May 1, 2008
repositories
•blogs.ittoolbox.com/visualbasic/dotnet/archiv...
People who like this website
StumbleUpon is the best way to discover great web sites, videos, photos, blogs and more - based on your interests.
Everything is submitted and rated by the community. Discover, share and review the best of the web!
Reviews of this website
Zalmoxsis discovered 3 months ago- Another thumbs-up which really ought to be a thumbs-down; but since I've discovered it, I must give it a thumbs-up to get credit for the discovery, or even to review it. O! the burdens of responsibility! This guy seems a little more informed about his subject than most non-Linux users who write about Linux; but he still says some pretty stupid stuff. For example: He complains that the Linux repositories are hard to search for the software that you need. Well, I'm hardly a Linux expert, but in the past year I cannot complain about not finding software. (In Linux, there are about 2 or 3 choices for everything, sometimes more: for example, I have 11 different browsers.) And as far as goes that problem of 'dependencies' (libraries, drivers, and other obscure files necessary to make larger programs work): When you click to install the program, Synaptic (the software manager that comes bundled with most Linux distros) automatically tells you what dependencies are needed, and marks them to install. Then you can choose to install, or not. He charges that if you enable upgrades, then you must accept all upgrades, or none at all; which is sort of true, but not really a problem for an experienced user. If you insist on using an older version of a program, you can simply force the version you want; or go to the home page of its creator, download it, and install from source. Furthermore, he accuses the Linux community with a kind of elitism, because only a handful of people can decide what's included in a repository. What kind of alternative does he propose? Perhaps those with malicious or criminal intentions ought to be allowed to exercise their democratic right to load up the repositories with spyware, malware, viruses, trojans, etc.? (Oh, wait -- that sounds too much like running Windows!) I, for one, am glad that people who know what they're doing oversee the process; and the result is, I have a system which has run consistently with no problems, no crashes, no errors, no Blue Screens of Death, for over a year now. By the way, while there are something like 500,000 verified viruses, trojans, rootkits, etc. for Windows circulating 'out there', at present only some 40+ viruses have been verified for Linux. If Linux is elitist, very well, then: that's another good reason to be one of the elect. Is it hard to find your way around a Linux repository, or hard to get used to another operating system, with its own idiosyncratic commands and such? Well, yes -- at first. You didn't expect you would change operating systems, from the ground up, and then to have something that runs exactly like Windows; or did you? In fact, changing to Linux is a little like moving to another planet. The language is different, the culture is different, fundamental assumptions about everything are different. But then, once you get used to the new environment, everything makes perfect sense, everything works smoothly. To say that Linux is too hard to get used to, too difficult to find the software you want: it's like complaining that it's too hard to find your way round Afghanistan and Iraq, because not many people there speak English ... yet. His final bit of absurdity is to suggest that there ought to be some 'congressional oversight' of Linux repositories! Why? and how? Off the top of my head, I know of two Linux repositories in the U.S. -- both hosted by respectable academic institutions, Georgia Tech and Indiana University. The rest (of which I use maybe half a dozen) are located in Ireland, Japan, South Africa, Australia, Belgium, Hungary, Italy, etc. Now how should our government presume to oversee what goes on in those repositories? Since I don't have a dollar to spare (so that this guy can go out a buy a clue), I will offer here instead my own advice: Expand your mind! Try new things! As a guiding principle, I tend to trust individuals more than groups. Anybody, once you get to know them face-to-face, may have some good qualities. Individuals -- people like you and me, sitting there in front of a computer screen -- create Linux software. For the opposite reason, I mistrust governments and big corporations, because they want to get things from you that you may not want to give away. You see, I have this innate suspicion of 'herd mentality'. The people who work for those amorphous entities cannot be held accountable for the software they create; just as the executives of those companies, or government officials, are very slippery, when we seek justice. When at last you believe that you have them pinned down, you'll hear them say, 'But I was just doing my job!' or 'My boss told me to do it!' or 'It was a management decision!' Who do you trust?
