Linux so far no software hare (fwd)

[Peter Hiscocks]

Nice response, Hugh. The offer to produce something is a positive response.
Newspapers are always looking for material, and they love controversy. But
for the business section, it would have to be researched, with statistics,
and that's a lot of work.

An easier approach might be to find someone who has recently started using
Linux and do a 'point of view' article on their experience.

Something that could have a headline like 'Cutting the Windows Umbilical
Cord: Diane tries Linux'. These sorts of things appear all the time in the
Star. 

Peter



On Tue, Jan 27, 2004 at 05:08:27AM -0500, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> I just sent this to the Star.  I sent it as an article to the Business
> section.  I don't really know the best place.  Perhaps their
> Ombudsman.
> 
> 
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 05:06:26 -0500 (EST)
> From: D. Hugh Redelmeier <hugh-pmF8o41NoarQT0dZR+AlfA at public.gmane.org>
> To: business-4aHm7/Ykixuw5LPnMra/2Q at public.gmane.org
> Subject: Linux so far no software hare
> 
> I read your article "Linux so far no software hare" in Monday's Star.
> 
> As Wolfgang Pauli once said: "This paper is so bad it is not even
> wrong."
> 
> The article is very misleading to the uninitiated, the apparent target
> audience.  It keeps claiming weaknesses in Linux without actually
> specifying what they are.
> 
> I've used Linux for perhaps 8 years.  It is what I run on my desktop.
> On the other hand, I don't recommend it to my father.  The decision
> whether to use Linux on a desktop involves a number of aspects and
> this article addresses none of them.
> 
> In the computer business, we call this spreading FUD: Fear,
> Uncertainty, and Doubt (implicitly: with insufficient technical
> basis).
> 
> I'd be happy to write an article on this topic with some actual
> content.
> 
> " Linux so far no software hare
> " System is making slow progress into mainstream Keeners admit its
> " shortcomings
> 
> [This appears to need punctuation.  Your printed copy gets this
> right but your web site (quoted above) gets it wrong.]
> 
> Linux has made fast progress into the mainstream of many markets.  The
> article means "desktop" but does not say so.
> 
> " at N.Y. trade show
> 
> Which one?  Why not say "LinuxWorld" here?
> 
> " ERIC AUCHARD
> " REUTERS NEWS AGENCY
> " 
> " NEW YORK As never before, corporate customers are turning to Linux
> " software instead of Microsoft Windows to run big business operations.
> 
> Many corporate customers have never used MS Windows for server tasks.
> Most are turning from UNIX to Linux (MS Windows has historically been
> weak as a server OS).
> 
> If the paragraph had said "desktop", then it would be more clearly
> communicating what I infer that it intended to.
> 
> " Now, if only they could get the word processor's basic "cut and paste"
> " feature to work.
> 
> This comment seems to be precise, but I don't know what it refers to.
> There are many word processors on LINUX and none that I've tried has
> had a problem with basic cut and paste.
> 
> " At the LinuxWorld trade show here last week, advocates said the next
> " big challenge for the loose-knit "free software" movement is to create
> " a reliable way to run desktop computers and perform mainstream office
> " tasks.
> 
> What does that mean?  What isn't reliable?  Who said it?  Linux
> Advocates are not of one mind.  Many have their own agendas.
> 
> It is widely believed that Linux is more reliable than MS Windows.
> The hard statistics I've seen have been about server installations so
> they might not apply.
> 
> " "It works 98 per cent of the time. But it's the 2 per cent of the time
> " it doesn't that kills you," Jeremy White, a leading developer of Linux
> " applications, told an audience of network administrators.
> 
> Jeremy White isn't a leading developer of Linux applications, as far as
> I know.  He is the CEO of CodeWeavers, a company whose product is
> designed to run MS Windows applications on Linux.  This is not an
> unbiased viewpoint.
> 
> " Even some of its biggest proponents admit that Linux has a long way to
> " go before it can mount a credible alternative to Microsoft Windows,
> " the world's dominant software operating system.
> 
> Credible in what sense?  This is a vague, hand-waving statement.
> So vague as to be useless.  Except as FUD.
> 
> " "Linux desktops need a little more work to be consistent," said Jack
> " Messman, chairman and chief executive of Novell Inc.
> 
> Consistent in what way?  (I think that I understand why he said that
> but the article would not convey this to a reader.)
> 
> " "I don't know how much of that will come about this year."
> 
> If we don't know what "that" is, we won't even recognize when it has
> arrived.
> 
> " His 20-year-old network software company, with two acquisitions of
> " high-profile Linux companies in the past year, has become the No. 2
> " independent supplier of Linux software.
> " 
> " "It's a big pile of lumber with no agreed-upon standards," complained
> " White, president of St. Paul, Minn.-based software company
> " CodeWeavers.
> 
> Same CodeWeavers CEO with a product to push.
> 
> As Andy Tannenbaum once said, "the great thing about standards is that
> there are so many to choose from."  Linux certainly follows more
> standards than does MS Windows.
> 
> " Linux relies on a network of independent programmers to improve its
> " software. Its users are required to share the computer code they
> " create.
> 
> This is false: Linux users are not required to share the computer code
> they create.
> 
> " This is a dramatic shift from traditional secretive software
> " development.
> 
> Not really.  The way Linux has developed is an evolution from the way
> software used to be developed.  The commercial production of software
> as a product (the way Microsoft does development) is something that
> only developed historically recently.
> 
> " But it has won a wide and growing fan base among computer programmers,
> " academics, corporate customers and government agencies in developing
> " countries.
> 
> That is true.  But there is also a wide and growing base of users.
> The paragraph implicitly puts down Linux without justifying the
> put-down.
> 
> " The trouble for Linux is that it must move quickly to create a
> " credible alternative to Windows. Analysts say Linux has a window of
> " opportunity before Microsoft's next major operating system is released
> " sometime around 2006.
> 
> There are many "troubles" with Linux, not just one.
> 
> There is no reason that Linux must do anything.  Some folks may want
> it to "move quickly to create a credible alternative to Windows".
> There is no "must" about this.
> 
> Linux is quite credible.  Why must it be judged as an immitation MS
> Windows?  Trying to play catchup is a rather unimaginative game.
> 
> " Open Source Development Labs, a corporate-customer-backed consortium
> " that employs Linux inventor Linus Torvalds, said last week it would
> " lead a drive for standards to make Linux work smoothly on desktop PCs.
> 
> The word "smoothly" does not convey any actual information.  Except
> possibly that Linux must be rough in some way.  What way?  More FUD.
> 
> " Stuart Cohen, chief executive of Beaverton, Ore.-based OSDL, said its
> " Desktop Linux Working Group will be backed by many of the world's
> " biggest computer companies as well as key corporate customers.
> " 
> " The strategy is to nibble away at the edges of the Windows world and
> " target computers that run primarily one or two applications, such as
> " retail check-out terminals, customer call centres and centrally
> " managed office worker terminals.
> 
> Nibbling certainly sounds like a bold strategy.  Microsoft must be
> quaking in its boots.
> 
> One great thing about Linux is that it can accommodate many different
> goals.  Mine certainly isn't nibbling.
> 
> " LinuxWorld is a showcase of where the Linux desktop is headed.
> 
> And a showcase of many other things.  The desktop is not the primary
> focus of LinuxWorld.
> 
> " CodeWeavers has created an innovative program called CrossOver Office.
> " It allows users to run standard Windows programs like Office, Internet
> " Explorer, Lotus Notes and Photoshop on Linux PCs with no special
> " effort and few if any detectable glitches.
> 
> I think that this paragraph is mostly true.  But it is misleading:
> CrossOver Office doesn't run all MS Windows programs -- only some have
> been tested.  So this paragraph appears to make too broad a claim for
> CrossOver Office.
> 
> " Office documents created using Microsoft Windows PCs can be saved and
> " reopened on Linux PCs without suffering the sort of software conflicts
> " that cause programs to crash. This mundane compatibility is a crucial
> " test of Linux's viability as a potential replacement for Windows.
> 
> This fails to mention that a copy of MS Office must be purchased to do
> this.
> 
> I've not found that OpenOffice (available on Linux and MS Windows at
> no charge) crashed on the few MS Office documents that I've fed it.
> What "software conflicts" could he be referring to?
> 
> MS Office itself is unlikely to be more stable on Linux than on MS
> Windows.
> 
> It would be good to mention that Microsoft has interlocking
> monopolies.  The operating system, the word processor, the spread
> sheet, and so on are all locked together in a defensive phalanx.  The
> point of this article is really that it is hard to penetrate this
> defense because of these mutually supportive monopolies.
> 
> " Xandros Inc. of Ottawa recently introduced Version 2 of its
> " Windows-like desktop operating system that combines the stability of
> " Linux with the look-and-feel of Windows. It boasts easy installation
> " in just four clicks, simpler than installing Windows 2000 on a new
> " machine.
> 
> This seems out of place in an article about Linux in general.  There
> are several other Linux desktops that are much more popular.
> 
> " Market research company International Data Corp., of Framingham,
> " Mass., estimates that paid shipments of Linux rose to 2.8 per cent of
> " desktop operating systems in 2002, up from 1.7 per cent two years
> " earlier.
> 
> I'm not sure why "paid shipments" of a free system are a reasonable
> measure.  Certainly not in comparison with non-free systems (MS
> Windows or MacOS).
> 
> " But that is still below the approximately 3 per cent share of No. 2
> " ranked Apple Computer Inc., which more than a decade ago gave up
> " trying to compete directly with Microsoft.
> 
> In what sense don't they compete directly with Microsoft?  What event
> happened more than a decade ago?
> 
> This article does a disservice to the Star readers.
> 
> Hugh Redelmeier
> hugh-pmF8o41NoarQT0dZR+AlfA at public.gmane.org  voice: +1 416 482-8253
> 
> 
> 
> --
> The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
> TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
> How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml

-- 
Peter D. Hiscocks                         	   
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering    
Ryerson University,                    
350 Victoria Street,
Toronto, Ontario, M5B 2K3, Canada

Phone:   (416) 979-5000 Ext 6109
Fax:     (416) 979-5280
Email:   phiscock-g851W1bGYuGnS0EtXVNi6w at public.gmane.org
URL:     http://www.ee.ryerson.ca/~phiscock
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://tlug.ss.org
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://tlug.ss.org/subscribe.shtml