I think a great many more people beyond the many that already do so today will find Linux' freedom very attractive and refreshing. It will take time, but we'll get there. Of course, software patents can put an end to freedom if we don't eventually eliminate them ( http://www.linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2010-06-17-015-39-OP-MS-SW "Watch Microsoft megatrolls monopolize Linux" )

Some vocal Windows enthusiasts seem to be deeply disturbed by Linux' growing success. Over 95% of supercomputers, 44% of servers (equal to Windows), and a third of netbooks run Linux. Even the most pessimistic of claims shows Linux desktop usage still growing, if slowly, somewhere between 1.13% and 5% of the market. Linux is the fastest growing smartphone OS today between Android, webOS, and the upcoming Meego, and a wide variety of tablets were recently announced to ship with these Linux distros in the coming months.

Windows 7 has been reasonably well received, and Windows Phone 7 has a least received some positive press (it should be on actual devices by this Christmas). It's not necessary for these Windows enthusiasts to be so defensive. But since so many Linux fans were back when we were struggling, I suppose tolerance and patience is the best response today.

I'll always advocate for freedom. But respectful, fact-based encouragement is certainly the best approach.

The dogs bark and the caravan passes on. I, for one, strongly believe that the time spent on defending Linux (and FLOSS in general) as a superior IT solution could be better invested in focusing on how to further the superiority of the solution. I think wisdom would agree with the assertion that most men cannot be contented. But most men can be impressed. I've noticed that even among Apple users (excluding those brushed-aluminum worshipers and adepts of the secret cult of the Church of Stevus the free world use to call "fanboys") even Apple users as I was saying can't help but admire my not-so-fancy Ubuntu desktop (I say ubuntu but it could have been any popular distro) running state-of-the-art software in four degrees of freedom (thing GNU), leave alone my using a bare USB drive to start up a full-fledged operating system after spending less than 5 minutes to install it, distro and tools download time included, on _their_ computer and without writing a single command.

A couple of years ago I used to say "Linux rocks, yeah just give it a try, etc." and everybody said I was a zealot. Now I just open my laptop or boot a live-USB on others' PCs, use my favorite OS and when they say "Wow, what's this ?" I answer "Oh, that's nothing, that's just Linux." Usually, it takes less than a couple of minutes before they ask back "How can I get this on my computer ?". Passive marketing, it works !
Of course, if they want Linux I have to hold their hands in the first couple of weeks but I like it (since I can't contribute code I'd better help code be used.)

It is good thing to share out point of view on global society issues like freedom as well as on technical ones, but in no case should we take part to flame wars and heated debates over trifles like Linux_sux_Windows_rox. After all, it we do our duty in showing the way to software freedom but others nonetheless disagree, then we should respect their freedom not to agree with us and even not to agree with facts and logic. We should even pity them, without condescension, because they are not smart enough to see what's good for them. Stupidity is probably a flaw but definitely not a crime.

Interesting. I just so happen to be a proud member of Linsux. I use Linux on my desktop, I publish Linux how-tos, and I write open source software for Linux freely available to all.

"It's also awesome that these folks have so much free time on their hands that they aren't contributing to society by volunteering or creating something for the good of all. But, they sure love to criticize those who do."

What is awesome is that you wrote an article completely devoid of facts.

These inaccurate statements just make you yet another fanboi, just the uninformed zealot kind.

If you had actually taken the trouble to actually read LHB or linsux, you would see that the vast majority of the posters on both sites are Linux users who are sick of the fanboys and the harm that they do to Linux.

Most of the "Linux hatred" on the internet comes from Linux users who are sick and tired of the fanboys who only use Linux because it has become fashionable in certain circles to hate Microsoft and see their use of Linux as "sticking it to the man", these people generally do not know a whole lot about Linux and are so determined to preach about how much better Linux is than Windows they studiously ignore all faults in Linux and assume that anyone who does criticise Linux is either too stupid to use Linux, is a Microsoft employee spreading FUD or is simply lying. I have been accused of all three of these when I have pointed out obvious flaws in Linux.

Linux on the desktop is a disaster (the fact that so many servers, supercomputers and phones use Linux cannot take away from this) and it will never stop being a disaster until the Linux community wakes up to the fact that it is a disaster and starts addressing the problems instead of trying to shout "WorksForMe(TM)" so load that they drown out any criticism at all. When you have a desktop OS which has millions of fanboys screaming about how wonderful it is then you end up with developers like the Ubuntu devs who believe that they can do no wrong and that it really doesn't matter if they release a system which breaks hardware functionality for a significant number of users on a regular basis.

Instead of responding to sites like LHB and Linsux with comments like
"* By awesome, I mean that they suck.

** By intellectual, I mean that they're not intellectual."
and dismissing everything bad said about Linux as FUD, the Linux community would do better to sit up and listen to what is wrong with Linux.

The article is a good read. Years ago when I began using a "computer" I purchased a Radio Shack Trash 80. It was good learning tool, but I wanted more and that led me to looking at Apple, but the cost was and still is prohibitive and so I opted for the PC. I purchased a NOrthgate 286 PC with 1 meg of RAM, but I was not pleased with the OS. To replace the OS I bought DR-DOS and stuck with that until I upgraded my system to a 486. At this time I was really interested in UNIX and began seriously at purchasing UNIX. It was about this time that I also heard of a new OS that was FREE and I researched it. My curiosity about this new OS was overwhelming and I proceeded to download the OS to nearly 100 diskettes.

I dumped DOS and installed this new OS and found it lacking many things. However, I saw an opportunity to learn more and see where this new OS would go, and of course the new OS is LINUX. There was much promise and I continued to observe the progress of Linux in the computing landscape. It wasn't long before Red Hat appeared on the scene and I was quick to download it. Today I have Fedora 13 and I am very impressed with its ability to discover and install most of my peripherals. My wife now uses Linux and her computing experience is better and a far cry of calling me and asking what the error message in windows was telling her. I can't wait for the new Fedora to come out!

That's like Michael Jordan being a member of a Basketball Haters Group or Simon Wiesenthal being a member of the Nazi party. It doesn't make sense to me. So, perhaps it isn't my facts that are flawed but the logic of being fan of something and a member of a hate group of that thing. Odd. Very odd.

No, the problem here is that your logic is just flawed. You should have done some research before blindly assuming it is a Linux hate group.

Lovely analogies, both, and elegantly skating near to the Godwin fallacy without quite falling through the ice.

As I understand it, Michael Jordan enjoyed playing basketball and was happy to spend his working life doing so. If he'd hated basketball, this analogy would make more sense.

From memory, I'm pretty sure that Simon Wiesenthal was Jewish, and known to be Jewish. As such, his chances of joining the Nazi party were slim to none. This analogy would be a closer approximation if you transposed it a little and made it "Joseph Goebbels insisting on all his speeches being broadcast in Yiddish." At which point your logical fallacy is, I would hope, apparent.

Don't miss out on The TM Repository, incidentally. We have three main weapons: Linsux, LHB, TMR, and a fanatical devotion to Ballmer. No, wait, we have four main weapons ... I'll start again.

We need Linux (in all its flavors), we need Windows, we need Apple, and we could use still other choices. When ATT had a monopoly on the telephone you had a black, dial phone with lousy acoustics and lousy service. You would still have it today if the monopoly was not busted.
There are Chevy fans, Toyota fans, Ford fans, ad infinitum. They foam at the mouth about their preferences and why they have them. In theory (and I believe in reality) having many technology-sources drives innovation and quality. Multiple, independent sources are forced to ask: “How can we make our product better? How can we distinguish ourselves? What are the consequences of our mistakes?”
Linux developers chafe at Windows developers. Something that rhymes with Megaloft worries about at the Linux threat. They say, “Let’s make our product better. Let’s try to make the choice a no-brainer.” Ideally, the computer-using community benefits - no matter what individual choice is exercised.

"Schmindows?" "Megaloft?"

OK, I'll join in. "Snapple?" No, that's taken. "AssHat?" No, I like RHEL. "GoodForYux?" No, it's more tragic than comic. "Supercalifragilisticexpialolaris?"

Jeez. There are school-children who would consider this stuff beneath their dignity.

sucks != hate

I know that you know this already, you seem like a smart guy. Just admit your error, and move on.

I bet you probably haven't spent 2 seconds thinking about how it may mean Linux zealots suck, or Linux quality sucks. What am I saying here? I am implying that you are being short sighted.

You are stuck in zealot mode. People can think something sucks without hating it. Sucks means needs improvement, or doesn't meet my standards. It doesn't mean "hate" as you imply.

Shmindows, schmindows. The former is a better fit, I guess, but we're in louse/flea territory here. The Megaloft thing comes from a post directly above.

You can't really start with a paragraph that uses less-than-clever references like "iCrap" and "Shmindows;" follow up with a paragraph that ends with the resounding statement "We, I'm sorry to say, are equally guilty;" complain in the third paragraph about virtual tagging; and then describe sites that you don't agree with as "awesome [not] and intellectual [not]" without exposing yourself to ridicule.

If you're going to be ironic, then be ironic. Don't trample over your own irony.

If you're going to criticise other sites, then making the absurd implication that they consider themselves "awesome" or "intellectual" is fairly self-defeating.

Intellectual? Next you'll be calling "us" Elitist. Actually, we're just plain folk who are often forced to use Linux on the desktop, and object to that fact. We're not as intellectual as http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/, say, but then the subject matter is hardly intellectually inspiring. (Feel free to substitute the OSX desktop or the Win7 desktop, and this assertion holds equally well.)

Essentially, it looks like you're trying to make a reasoned and balanced argument about playing nice, and then you drop a ten ton weight on your foot before jamming it straight down your throat.

Thanks Doc,

I guess my main point was to say that anything named with a suffix of "sux" typical means that you aren't particularly in favor of it. For example, if I start a website named say, www.fewtsux.com, would you think I was a fan or an opponent of Fewt?
Unless of course, "sux" doesn't mean what I think it means.

A website named say, www.fewtsux.com? I'd say that you were an opponent of Fewt, or possibly that you're addressing an extraordinarily narrow niche in the internet pornography market. In what way is this "main point" relevant?

I'd also assume that (unless it's pornography) you'd get very little traffic indeed, unless there are thousands and thousands of people out there who know and loathe Mr/Mrs/Ms Fewt. Which is unlikely. There is, however, a market for sites that criticise Linux. I know Mrs Finkle in fourth grade would like us all to be nice to each other and remember that, after all, we are all the same under the desktop skin; but, really, that doesn't work once you're grown up. Only a really naughty nine year old would call their site www.happy-penguin-feet.com and then trash Linux. Honesty ... yes, honesty. That reminds me. It's another commodity that self-proclaimed Linux evangelists sadly lack.

I tend to be strongly critical of things I don't think have too much hope in terms of being fixed to my liking. This is why I am highly critical of mono, of Microsoft technology, and of Microsoft. If I had hope in the monopolist or proprietary model, I would not talk up the negatives nearly as much as I do.

I would think most people most of the time when criticizing Linux strongly or in a way that would tend to have an observer think lowly of the product or to ignore it would be more interested in that effect (or have little hope for improvement) rather than in helping to improve the product.

I don't know if any of those websites falls into this category, but I am not a fan of the bits I have read from some of them because I have gotten the impression there was a greater interested in creating damage than in helping.

Also, I am suspicious of sites that don't post comments (or who take them down) critical of strong closed source supporters and monopolies (eg, like Microsoft) as has happened to some of my comments in various places (I don't remember much about those websites mentioned above, btw).

Is it not possible this is a response to all the windows hate sites on the internet? Not just slashdot (although that could certainly be counted), there's a huge pro-linux bias on sites like digg, reddit, etc, not to mention blatant anti-ms hate sites like windows7sins.org and defectivebydesign.org. Those 2 are actually funded by the FSF, a non profit that takes donations and is dedicated to furthering the progress of FOSS. So, you donate money to the FSF and they hire webdesigners to slander MS, they apparently decided that the best way to advance linux advocacy is to start windows hate websites. Not to mention those sites are highly misleading, lying by both omission and by twisting the facts.

It's easy to hate hate hate on everyone, nobody bats an eye when people criticize every single aspect of windows design but as soon as you touch the linux sacred cow, you get zealots coming out of the woodwork to harp at you for being 'uninformed' or a 'noooob'. Linux hate sites are a response to this kind of attitude. I am an informed, security conscious IT professional with 10 years of sysadminning under my belt, and I like the features and ease of use windows gives me. To me, making things easier to administrate should be seen as a GOOD thing, a sign of progress. The linux philosophy seems to be to make everything as convoluted as possible, because if you dont need to read documentation for 5 hours to configure a single system service, clearly the software is inferior.

Is it not possible this is a response to all the windows hate sites on the internet? ... So, you donate money to the FSF and they hire webdesigners to slander MS, they apparently decided that the best way to advance linux advocacy ...

It's easy to hate hate hate on everyone, nobody bats an eye when people criticize every single aspect of windows design but as soon as you touch the linux sacred cow, you get zealots coming out of the woodwork to harp at you for being 'uninformed' or a 'noooob'. Linux hate sites are a response to this kind of attitude. I am an informed, security conscious IT professional with 10 years of sysadminning under my belt, and I like the features and ease of use windows gives me. ... The linux philosophy seems to be to make everything as convoluted as possible ....

A Linux hate site by people that don't like Linux. That makes sense.

What you have to remember is that Linux let's you have all the blueprints. You are free to change it. You can know what the software is doing.

What is the value of source code and of rights to modify and rebuild?

Can you understand why people feel they are being short-changed by Microsoft in relation to Linux?

Now, some people don't care about what might be going on with the software or having control. That's their business, but understand where the FSF is coming from (or at least to the extent many support them) when they work to raise awareness of these short-comings in Microsoft products as well as awareness of tactics used by Microsoft to suppress competition and keep people in a position where it is inconvenient or very difficult for them to move to a freer better-valued alternative.

To some people it is an insult and threatening to be forced to use Microsoft software in order to accomplish certain things. In some cases, we are just talking about conveniences and it's not that serious, especially since Linux comes with it's own set of advantages and simplifications (and low cost of course), but in other cases, it affects or could affect things at a more serious level.

It's natural that people point out that if open source software were used by the majority, regardless of vendor, then everyone would have access, but, because of closed source software and the network effect on lock-in products and documents (with Microsoft's central monopolies being the greatest supporter of these) most people are then forced into difficult compromises of their convenience, market options, security, or privacy.

As for why so many complain about Windows, there are a lot more people that have been burned by Windows than Linux for obvious reasons (Windows has been everyone for many many years), so, even without considering that Microsoft keeps secrets from you and works to encumber your documents and applications with dependencies on their platform, you simply have a lot more people that have built up bad experiences and gripes against Windows and Microsoft. [People also don't like to be gouged and more so when the monopolist keeping key blueprints from the public actually breaks the law.]

As for the FSF having nothing better to do, then you clearly have not seen their participation and contributions in many other areas that, if they affect Microsoft, it's because Microsoft simply champions so strongly tools that disable consumers and their competition. [Eg, DRM, software patents, Microsoft's anti-GPL rhetoric and policies, and core open platform technologies that enable competition to Microsoft's closed platforms.] Among the numerous things the FSF has done is to help maintain and preserve the integrity of a large number of core open source products (and licenses). Check out their line-up of key infrastructure software.

Finally, as for Linux being hard to administer, well, the focus has been on accuracy. Sometimes you can't turn precise control into a GUI or at least it takes time. There are drawbacks to pre-mature attempts to simplify administration. I hear many shops that move from Windows to Linux find a significant gain in productivity because of correctness and fine control that they were missing. People don't have to use fine control, but those that have access (and have learned how to use it) tend to like it over alternatives. You've heard about not judging a book by its cover, I am sure. Some book covers go to far, while others don't go far enough. [Not coincidentally, Windows is a highly marketed high cost product in relation to community owned and created Linux.]

PS: I expect the savvy individuals that are aggregating software patents, if not neutralized by good fair law or court decisions, will end up with so much leverage that they will decide who will own which market. This will hurt many VCs and business managers and software developers, all of whom will lose significant leverage based on their skillset or any other assets they have. You can't be too wealthy if you share too much! That is why some people love monopolies and keep trying to grow them into new areas. Of course, consumers will have to deal with much higher costs (many fewer freebies) and lower quality due to diminished opportunities for competition.