Aragorn
2005-09-22 08:07:46 UTC
Dear Newbies and Fellow Gnu/Linux Users,
First of all, brace yourselves. This is going to be a *VERY* long post!
There are two reasons as to why...
The first reason is that I'm an Aspie, i.e. I have Asperger's Syndrome,
otherwise known as High Functioning Autism. I have already stated this
on this newsgroup, as well as on other newsgroups I participate in.
I have no problem speaking of my condition as I don't see why I should
be ashamed of the fact that I was born with somewhat less developed but
in number far more prevalent and more complexly wired neurons in my
brain than as is the case in the brains of "normal" human beings.
AS/HFA is a handicap, but it's more of a social deficiency than an
intellectual one. In fact, people with AS/HFA usually have very high
IQ levels. I think it's therefore useful to inform people of my
handicap, as it helps them in assessing certain (re)actions of mine,
such as the writing of loooooooooong, elaborate posts on Usenet... ;-þ
Aspies are very thorough in their explanations and can virtually ramble
on forever when they need to point out the facts or the truth behind a
given situation, or when they feel enthusiastic about something. Both
apply to me right now. ;-)
The second reason behind my decision to contrive this lengthy post - and
the most important of the two - is the fact that this and other Usenet
newsgroups are constantly being plagued by so-called *trolls.*
For the newbie: A troll is a person who joins a newsgroup with the
intention of stirring up trouble between the participants of this
group, in the form of an attack on the main topic of the newsgroup.
This very group is called /comp.os.linux.advocacy/ and is dedicated to
promoting Gnu/Linux, both technically - as an operating system - and
ideologically - i.e. Gnu/Linux being Free & Open Source Software. It
is therefore a wet-dream target for Win-trolls and Apple-trolls.
For those of you who do not know me from other newsgroups - I use the
same nick in all groups - I haven't actually been subscribed to
/comp.os.linux.advocacy/ for all that long yet. Not that I wasn't
already an advocate of Free & Open Source Software - from here on
called "FOSS" - before I joined this group, but rather because I was
warned about the reputation of this newsgroup by a few regulars on
other Gnu/Linux-related newsgroups, who actually referred to
/comp.os.linux.advocacy/ as - and I quote - "a sewer"...
If the above shocks or offends you, then know that I am merely quoting
what others had told me; I am in no way saying that this group really
_is_ a sewer. In fact, I see many of the names here that I used to see
on /alt.os.linux.mandrake,/ and they are the names of respectable
people whose posts I appreciate.
It is however quite evident that - more than any other Gnu/Linux-related
newsgroup I'm subscribed to - this very newsgroup here is (becoming?) a
second home to many trolls - be it Win-trolls or Apple-trolls - because
of its very existence as an advocacy group. One could therefore more
accurately describe this newsgroup as "a demilitarized zone", with
terrorists sneaking in. ;-)
Apparently, trolls are all people who consider Gnu/Linux and FOSS to be
some kind of *threat* to them. They will post lies or half-truths -
i.e. twisted facts - to this and other Gnu/Linux-related newsgroups
with the intent of spreading Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - from here on
called "FUD" - among the Gnu/Linux newbies, or with the intent of
simply raising a few people's blood pressure levels as their idea of a
good time.
It must however be pointed out to the newbie (and serve as a reminder to
the more seasoned Gnu/Linux users) that no matter how well any of us
refute the untruths and half-truths spoken by such trolls, the trolls
themselves already seem to have fallen victim to their *own* FUD, as
they seem to direct their attacks onto aspects of the IT landscape that
fall beyond the scope of what Gnu/Linux and FOSS stand for.
So they are obviously afraid of something; something that Gnu/Linux
would cause to happen or would cause to get exposed...
From my experiences, I discern three very distinct trolling techniques,
although others /may/ exist. I will present them here below...
+++++
*[1]* _*The*_ _*"Windows-is-so-much-better"*_ _*Argument*_
This kind of posts usually attempts to discredit the technical quality
of Gnu/Linux, and to a smaller extent of other FOSS products such as
Mozilla FireFox, Mozilla Thunderbird, et al. This section therefore
makes up for the biggest chunk of text in this /little/ post of mine,
but I think it's quite an important read for every newbie... ;-)
While it is true that every operating system and every software product
contains bugs and flaws - after all, the people who write up that code
are only human - it is a given fact that FOSS products are of a
substantially higher quality than proprietary software products.
Proprietary software products - like Microsoft Windows, Microsoft
Office, et al - are being written by people who do so to make a living
for themselves (and/or their family members) - speaking of the actual
software developers, that is; I won't be addressing business strategies
or large-scale corporate objectives here.
In other words, the developers of proprietary software usually only
develop their code on a nine-to-five basis. There is less commitment
to creativity and perfection than with the FOSS developers, who write
up their software on a voluntarily basis and with their fullest
motivation and enthusiasm.
Additionally, proprietary software has commercial intentions. It is not
intended to work flawlessly or to serve your needs as a system
administrator or a home user - as much as Microsoft _wants_ you to
believe that it is, via their ubiquitous and royally funded advertising
campaigns.
The _prime_ _objective_ behind the development of proprietary software
is to earn money through the *sale* *of* *the* *product* and through
the *after-sales* *support.* Proprietary software such as Microsoft
Windows is a tradeable commodity, and it is specifically being created
for that purpose, so don't let the advertising slogans and the
buzzwords fool you.
Microsoft programmers have already confirmed "off the record" that
Windows typically ships with some 60'000 bugs, of which some 20'000 are
_*fatal*_ to the system's stability and/or integrity. And _this_ is
what _you_ as a user pay big dough for, even if it's "included with
your new computer". You see, what the salesguys usually don't tell you
is that the OEM license for Windows is already included in the price of
the machine.
And yes, let's talk about the license... When you buy a Microsoft
product, you are *licensed* to use that software on one computer -
other licenses exist for larger corporate needs, such as a license on
the number of network connections to a machine.
The above means that the only thing you actually *own* is the CD(-set)
or DVD that the software came on, along with the booklet and the box it
came in, if any. You *do* _*not*_ *own* *the* *software,* and you are
*not* *allowed* to modify it, not even for an improvement in the way
the software works on your own hardware! _Note:_ Applying personal
preferences such as wallpapers or color schemes is not a modification.
Free & Open Source Software on the other hand - there is a small
difference in the licensing between "Free Software" and "Open Source
Software", but they largely represent the same thing - are created by
enthusiasts - who are by no means amateurs; they are actually mostly
engineers - and is being scrutinized and even patched for better
security, stability and/or functionality before a Gnu/Linux distributor
decides to include the software as part of its distribution.
Considering the enthusiasm and creative spirit of the FOSS developers,
these people are highly committed to writing better software than
what's commercially available. They simply want their software to
work, and they go to great lengths to get there.
FOSS developers are happiest when people are using their software or
their code, and they want to exchange code with other developers so as
to improve on the codebase and make it as perfect as possible. These
people are artists, not merchants, and they want to be allowed to share
that code with other developers, or to tweak the code written by
others. _This_ is what the word "free" in Free Software stands for:
freedom!
Next to all of the above, there is yet another important difference
between Gnu/Linux and Microsoft Windows. This difference lies in the
design of both platforms.
Microsoft Windows was originally developed as a GUI-oriented add-on for
MS-DOS. Next to offering a more user-friendly graphical interface to
MS-DOS, it allowed the user to more or less run multiple applications
concurrently - a principle known as /multi-tasking/ - and allowed for
all of the memory in the computer to be used, whereas DOS itself could
only access 640 KB of physical memory and had no knowledge whatsoever
about paging the memory contents to a hard disk. DOS actually only
started supporting hard disks themselves from version 3.00 on. ;-)
Originally, Windows used a multi-tasking scheduling known as
"cooperative multi-tasking", which was very similar to the
multi-tasking on the MacIntosh operating systems of the same era, i.e.
the applications decided how many CPU-cycles they would use up before
they would pass on the CPU to other tasks.
Later on the multi-tasking aspect of Windows was changed to a
"preemptive" model - i.e. not the application but the operating system
kernel decides how much CPU time is given to each process - and Windows
became an independent operating system, in the sense that it didn't
require MS-DOS to be installed separately anymore.
Again a bit later, Windows shifted from relying on a built-in MS-DOS to
being based upon a new type of kernel, known as the New Technology
kernel - from here on referred to as "NT" ;-). Along with the shifting
to this newer 32-bit kernel, Windows also begot some add-ons that
allowed it to function as a server.
The essence of Windows however still is an end-user appliance that does
not fully utilize the power of the underlying hardware and that
restricts the end-user in the ways for performing a certain task.
The server functionality of Windows is just an add-on, regardless of how
extensive it may be, or how extensive Microsoft wants businesses to
believe, and the functionality is seriously crippled by the existence
of Windows as a GUI-only system - with a very limited and emulated
commandline interface - and by its licensing, which prohibits anyone
from modifying the system's binary code or design.
Windows has poor memory management - particularly where it concerns the
paging of memory to the hard disk - and has no security built-in unless
the NTFS filesystem is used. This filesystem - as well as the /vfat/
filesystem, otherwise known to Windows users as "FAT32" - severely
fragments over a very short period of time, inducing severe stability
and performance penalties.
Windows also needlessly uses Remote Procedure Calls - also known as
"RPC" - for internal inter-process communication, which greatly renders
the system vulnerable to cracking attacks from the outside. Thus
arises the absolute *_need_* for Windows users to install a firewalling
application or invest in a hardware firewall.
For long, Windows users had to rely on third party software to hunt down
viruses, spyware, keyloggers, browser hijackers and other malware, to
defragment the filesystem, to clean up the Registry from unwanted keys
- some of which were solely put in place to ensure the proper
enforcement of software licenses, e.g. remnants of trial versions which
would prevent you from re-installing the software after its trial
period had expired - and to block hazardous network traffic - i.e. the
firewall.
Microsoft has in the meantime absorbed or duplicated some of those tools
and is now offering them to the user directly - either shipped with
Windows or shipped as a bonus within a Service Pack - or indirectly
among the downloadable software at the Microsoft website. Thusfar
Microsoft Windows, no matter what trolls may say.
Gnu/Linux on the other hand is a UNIX clone. It looks, feels and
behaves itself towards the users and towards its installed programs as
a UNIX system. It uses the proven UNIX architecture, although it was
written from scratch, and it aims for compliance with the POSIX
standards and the Single UNIX Specification.
To cut a long story short, GNU was written from scratch in 1984 by
Richard M. Stallman - the founder and president of the Free Software
Foundation - and his friends, as a Free Software UNIX clone. Its
native kernel - a microkernel - is called the "Mach kernel" - and a set
of userspace services known as "the Hurd".
_Note:_ The kernel is the central part of an operating system. It
manages the process scheduling, the memory and the I/O. Monolithic
kernels also manage the hardware. Microkernels leave this aspect to
userspace drivers, i.e. drivers that run in the CPU's lowest privilege
mode. All modern microprocessors have four privilege level /rings,/
numbered from 0 (highest) to 3 (lowest). All modern operating systems
only use /rings/ 0 (kernelspace) and 3 (userspace).
The GNU operating system was a complete and "production-ready" platform,
except for one thing...: the Hurd was far from ready and far from
stable for a long time. It has in the meantime reached
production-level quality and a Gnu/Hurd operating system can be freely
downloaded from the Debian website, for those of you who might be
interested. Be sure to read the documentation first! ;-)
Considering that "RMS" - as Richard Stallman calls himself - and his
friends had no commercial interests, they also never committed
themselves to promoting their GNU operating system via advertising.
Instead, they only chose to promote the ideology itself, which helped
the community grow and helped further development of the system.
In 1991, Linus Benedict Torvalds was studying at the University of
Helsinki. He was actually originally using /Minix/ - a UNIX-like
operating system developed by Professor Alan Tannenbaum for educational
purposes only - on his own i386 computer.
In order to better study the instructionset of the Intel 80386 CPU he
had one in his own machine, Linus Torvalds started off writing a
monolithic UNIX-style kernel for it from scratch, hereby using the GNU
tools such as /glibc/ and /gcc./ He had also attended a symposium by
Richard Stallman, and he decided to release his kernel under the terms
and conditions of the GNU General Public License - usually referred to
as "the GPL". :-)
Linus Torvalds originally intended to call his kernel "Freax" - "FREa
uniX" - but his friends - whom he had shared his code with and who had
helped him in its further development - found it more appropriate to
name it after Linus himself. Hence the name "Linux".
So, it was Linus Torvalds who wrote Linux, the kernel. The rest of the
operating system however all came from the GNU project, which itself
didn't have a production-ready kernel. Hence "Gnu/Linux". Soon, other
Free Software was added on to provide for a complete distribution - I
may be wrong, but I think /Slackware/ was the first real distro - and
the rest is history... ;-)
Being a UNIX clone, Gnu/Linux was built from the ground up with security
features such as permission masks, file ownerships and extended file
attributes, all along the UNIX tradition. UNIX as an architecture was
first developed in the late 1960's by Thomson and Ritchie at AT&T - but
originally just so they could play games on an unused PDP-11 in their
spare time - and was already a production-ready operating system by the
early 1970's, i.e. long before MS-DOS, and even before CP/M, of which
MS-DOS was an improved version.
UNIX systems are multi-tasking, /multi-threading/ - i.e. they can split
up running processes into smaller sections called "threads" and use
those for their time-slicing - _and_ they are /multi-user/ systems.
This means that they are intended to have more than one user being
logged into the system at the same time, performing different tasks.
_Note:_ The NT-based versions of Windows are also multi-threading, but
Windows is actually an end-user-oriented platform and so its server,
security and multi-user functionalities are not part of its design.
They are added on as additional layers on top of the base design,
contrary to what is the case in UNIX operating systems.
UNIX originally ran on mainframes and minicomputers, and was later on
ported to the microcomputer, when that architecture begot a
sufficiently powerful CPU. The UNIX design is a complete client/server
architecture - i.e. a whole network within one physical computer system
- and even in the workstation market, it has been the preferred
platform for software development, scientific and medical research and
analysis for many, many years.
Just to give you an example: the animated movies "Shrek", "Shrek 2" and
"Final Fantasy" as well as the dinosaurs in "Jurassic Park" were
created on supercomputers - i.e. clusters of inter-connected computers
that distribute their computing over all connected systems - that were
all running and governed by Gnu/Linux... I may again be wrong, but I
seem to remember that George Lucas also opted for Gnu/Linux clusters
for the rendering of the sci-fi scenes in his last three "Star Wars"
movies. ;-)
Just as with the commercially vended UNIX platforms, Gnu/Linux has been
time-proven to be suitable for mission-critical environments. Its
stability, power, flexibility, versatility, maintainability,
reliability, portability and scalability are already world-renowned -
no matter what any troll tells you. So it's far from being an underdog
or an insignificant hobby project.
Gnu/Linux has already been ported to just about every existing hardware
architecture out there; from wristwatches, PDA's, GPS systems and other
embedded devices over personal computers, professional high-end
workstations and servers, up to minicomputers, clustered
supercomputers, and even IBM mainframes like the S/390.
The above may already seem like an endlessly long list of facts to you -
well... it is, actually **lol** - but still it is only a *small*
excerpt from the enormous difference in design between Microsoft
Windows and Gnu/Linux.
The only thing you can say at most in relation to a technical comparison
between these two platforms, is that they can both be found runing on
the same hardware, i.e. the IA32, IA64 and x86-64 architectures.
The commercial nature of Microsoft Windows, the many non-disclosure
collaborations between Microsoft and other software (and hardware)
vendors and the resulting fact that the Linux kernel developers
actually have to go out and buy the latest hardware in order to
reverse-engineer it and whence develop a driver are the very reasons as
to why some hardware is simply not supported in Gnu/Linux just yet.
But just because it isn't supported _yet_ doesn't mean that it won't be
supported at some time soon. ;-)
Windows is by far not a better operating system than Gnu/Linux. Not
quality-wise, not ideology-wise and certainly not design-wise. In
fact, the contrary is all the more true.
However, Gnu/Linux is not, was not, and never will be a competitor for
Microsoft Windows. The very origin of the two systems and their
intrinsic designs are _completely_ different. This is also why
Gnu/Linux newbies should not demand that Gnu/Linux _becomes_ like
Windows in this or that aspect.
Some people like cats, others like dogs, but nobody goes off buying a
cat with the expectation that it'll behave like a dog, or vice versa.
By the same token, the rebuttal about the alleged user-unfriendliness
of Gnu/Linux is moot. If you want the power at your fingertips, you
have to be willing to learn how to use that power. Nobody can expect
to fly the Space Shuttle just because he's got a driver's license for a
sedan with an automatic transmission.
This all said, what you yourself think or feel would be the appropriate
operating system for your computer is _*your*_ choice, not ours and not
anybody else's...
_*That*_ is what Free Software is all about... ;-)
+++++
*[2]* _*The*_ _*Market-Share-and-Support*_ _*Argument*_
This one is a little shorter than the above chunk of text, but
nevertheless a favored trolling issue.
In the previous chapter, I have already mentioned that Microsoft has
certain non-disclosure deals with other proprietary software
developers, and even with hardware developers.
As a result of the latter, lots of hardware lacks support in Gnu/Linux.
The first reason for this is that the hardware vendors still consider
Gnu/Linux as something unimportant, just because it doesn't have a
(concrete) corporate (and thus legally liable) name behind it. After
all, Microsoft will always be around and will always be domineering the
end-user market. Or so the hardware vendors think.
Yet, many large corporations have already sided up with the Gnu/Linux
developers - for whatever reasons they may have, of course; it surely
isn't out of the kindness of their hearts. ;-) Such corporations are
IBM, HP, Novell and SGI, Sun Microsystems, Transmeta, Intel, AMD and
others.
In addition to the above, it is also noteworthy that Microsoft is
currently losing a great deal of its government support in other
countries than the USA. Many government administrations previously
relying on Microsoft and its products are now making the switch to
Gnu/Linux and other FOSS products.
The second reason for Microsoft's dominance on the desktop is that
Microsoft actually makes anti-FOSS deals with certain hardware vendors
- e.g. in the brandname PC market - ensuring that their hardware can
only fully be used with Windows.
Everyone with a critical eye on advertising and marketing can tell how
aggressively Microsoft attempts to gain the full 100% on each market.
Their position as a multinational and their very clever marketing
techniques - e.g. the embedding of IE/OE into the NT kernel - leaves
the end-user with very little incentive - other than security or
stability flaws - to try and use anything other than what Microsoft
presents them with.
The monopoly position of Microsoft is also detectable in other areas
than the operating system debate. For instance, I happen to be running
an IRC network with a couple of friends, and while IRC was still a very
popular medium a few years ago, the inclusion of MSN in Windows has
severely damaged that popularity...
Yet another factor in regards to popularity is the media, and by this
I'm not referring to the IT-related media, but rather to normal,
everyday journalism. This usually focuses on the political and
economic events in the world, not on IT, and so when something
IT-related deserves being reported in the news broadcasts on TV
stations or in a column in a newspaper - e.g. as with a dangerous virus
or worm - the journalists are far from educated on the subject and will
typically not even know that there is such a thing as Gnu/Linux unless
one of their sources explicitly refers to it as being "an alternative
operating system platform". _Note:_ Don't you hate that word
"alternative"? That's like saying that there's such a thing as a
"standard operating system"... **shake head** ;-)
Contrary to Windows, Gnu/Linux - although commercially vended by certain
distributions - does not force any particular application or tool onto
the user, and even supplies multiple but slightly different tools to
perform the same task.
See, the best way of thinking about Gnu/Linux - and UNIX in general - is
as a huge toolbox; you pick what you need or like for whatever it is
you want to do, and if you want something complex done fast, you
combine the tools into a script. Plenty of languages to choose from:
Bourne shell, Korn shell, C shell, Perl, Python, Ruby, etc. But I
digress, so let me return to the subject... ;-)
Commercial distributions are businesses and therefore do advertise.
They hope to win back some of the market share currently taken (and
aggressively/arrogantly defended) by Microsoft. They can however not
spend the same large amount on advertising and lobbying as a
multinational like Microsoft can, and considering the very ideology
behind Gnu/Linux, the distributors don't intend to play it dirty, even
if Microsoft does, e.g. by designing websites so that they can only be
viewed with IE. After all, if they were to do that, they wouldn't be
any better than that which they are trying to expose.
So what about the numbers? Does Microsoft have the largest share in the
desktop market? Yes, it does. Unmistakably! Do they earn that?
Considering the poor design and quality of their products, considering
their unfair alliances and monopolist techniques, the answer is "No,
they do not."
Will they keep their grip on this market? We don't know, and we don't
really care. All we care about is that we can hold on to our freedom
to choose another operating system than that which Microsoft and its
grunts dictate.
But how about the server market? Is it really true that Microsoft
dominates that one too? No, not by a long shot! Most server systems
connected to the Internet are running proprietary UNIX, Gnu/Linux or
one of the Open Source BSD's, i.e. FreeBSD - which is also used as the
basis for Apple's OS X - NetBSD or OpenBSD.
Microsoft does own a large percentage of the server market, but not even
half of it. Another, smaller section of the server market still relies
on Novell's Netware, possibly uses some older VMS system or may be
using the server version of Apple's OS X. These numbers are
negligible, though.
However, as I pointed out in the first chapter already: as Gnu/Linux is
all about freedom and has nothing to do with any commercial interests -
short of the commercial distribution vendors - the argument about
market shares is actually moot.
The point is not to gain market shares, the point is to bring the
message across that there still is something else out there but what
Microsoft and other proprietary vendors want you to believe, and that
you too can make use of (and contribute to) this technology, and the
Freedom it represents... ;-)
+++++
*[3]* _*The*_ _*Four-Letter-Word*_ _*Trolls*_
This requires the least bit of attention in my already very long
article, but they are here nevertheless... ;-)
We've all seen them already, and frankly, we don't know _why_ they still
bother. Their posts are so stupid and empty that they cannot have come
from anyone who's had a reasonable amount of parental education on
common decency and possesses average or above intelligence.
In other words, they are the kind that will post things like "Linux
sux", "f*ck you, Lintards" and other fine examples of prose. Arguing
with these cretins is a waste of your time, and they are best treated
with a prompt admission to your /killfile./ _Newbie_ _note:_ The
/killfile/ is a filter in your newsreader that filters out such posts,
based upon identities, thread subjects, targeted newsgroups, etc. If
you see someone saying "plonk" to someone else, it means they have
/killfiled/ them.
+++++
Now that the above is all said, the last subject I'm about to talk to in
this article is the phenomenon known as /Flatfish.../
I myself have actually never seen this troll in action under the
pseudonym Flatfish, but I did see references to the /Flatfish/ persona
in the replies to posts from this(/these?) individual(s?) when
he/she/them was/were using other pseudonyms while cross-posting to a
multitude of Gnu/Linux-related newsgroups - one of them being a group I
have already been on long before I to joined /comp.os.linux.advocacy/ -
*ànd* to the infamous /alt.os.windows-xp./
In fact, I have then replied to this troll, setting him/her straight on
the facts, just as I have done a few times now before I finally decided
I'd had enough of the nonsense. The regulars on this group may have
seen those replies being posted here as well.
The above is one of the main reasons why I finally decided to join
/comp.os.linux.advocacy/ in the first place. I feel that it is
important that we stand up to these trolls, because they are totally
distorting the very essence of this and other Gnu/Linux-related
newsgroups, and of the Free Software Foundation and the Open Source
Initiative themselves.
This all said, here are the entries I have in my /killfile/ regarding
this character... :
- ***@yahoo.com
- ***@yahoo.com
- ***@yahoo.com
- ***@yahoo.com
The first three entries were instated when this character decided to
cross-post to /alt.os.linux.mandrake,/ i.e. before I was subscribed to
/comp.os.linux.advocacy./
In the meantime, we have also already seen this troll as a number of
female characters such as Laura, Susan and Lisa - my latest /killfile/
addition - and possibly others, but I've got a mild migraine right now
so I can't really remember. ;-)
The different identities all represent the same (group of) person(s), as
there are some unmistakable analogies...
(1) Each time, the pseudonym matches the first half of the
e-mail address and contains underscores to separate the words
or firstname and lastname. Flatfish will surely change that
now... ;-)
(2) The e-mail address is a Yahoo webmail account, freshly
created a few hours or a day before the initial post from the
new identity.
(3) The poster starts two to four new threads in a timespan
of only a few hours and will follow up on some of the replies,
even posting a reply to him-/herself with a seemingly honest
complaint about our alleged rudeness, et al.
(4) A number of the "whines" returns in each post, e.g. the
argument of Windows software being used in schools or the
complaint that this or that hardware gadget - which was most
likely designed for Windows - will not work in Gnu/Linux.
(5) Sooner or later, the poster will start accusing us of being
zealots, nerds, geeks, and of not having a life, et al.
(6) The assault comes out of nothing, does its thing with great
fire and activity, and then dies again, all in a maximum
timespan of two days but often shorter.
(7) The individual behind these posts does know something about
IT, but by far not enough to substantiate any claims made. It
is most likely that he/she gets his/her inspiration from doing
a few Google searches for reports on the current state of
affairs in the "Microsoft versus FOSS" debate, and/or from
lurking on Gnu/Linux-related newsgroups, taking notes of the
problems encountered.
(8) Much of what this poster says will sooner or later conflict
with things he/she said earlier on while posting under the same
identity.
+++++
Thusfar this very long post of mine... As I said in my introduction,
this article was directed at both the newbies and the seasoned
Gnu/Linux users, although I chose to take out a bigger effort in aiming
more at the former category of readers. :-)
I sincerely hope that I haven't bored you people with this huge chunk of
text, and that I've managed to adequately explain what Gnu/Linux is
(and is not) about. I do however expect the Windows zealots to eagerly
jump to the occasion, since I've managed to tackle a few of their
arguments... ;-)
I wish to thank everyone who managed to read through this long post from
beginning to end without falling asleep, developing a headache or
turning into a werewolf (or any combination hereof). :-þ
_*Endnote:*_ Anything written in this post may be reproduced verbatim or
by reference elsewhere according to the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons License. ;-)
First of all, brace yourselves. This is going to be a *VERY* long post!
There are two reasons as to why...
The first reason is that I'm an Aspie, i.e. I have Asperger's Syndrome,
otherwise known as High Functioning Autism. I have already stated this
on this newsgroup, as well as on other newsgroups I participate in.
I have no problem speaking of my condition as I don't see why I should
be ashamed of the fact that I was born with somewhat less developed but
in number far more prevalent and more complexly wired neurons in my
brain than as is the case in the brains of "normal" human beings.
AS/HFA is a handicap, but it's more of a social deficiency than an
intellectual one. In fact, people with AS/HFA usually have very high
IQ levels. I think it's therefore useful to inform people of my
handicap, as it helps them in assessing certain (re)actions of mine,
such as the writing of loooooooooong, elaborate posts on Usenet... ;-þ
Aspies are very thorough in their explanations and can virtually ramble
on forever when they need to point out the facts or the truth behind a
given situation, or when they feel enthusiastic about something. Both
apply to me right now. ;-)
The second reason behind my decision to contrive this lengthy post - and
the most important of the two - is the fact that this and other Usenet
newsgroups are constantly being plagued by so-called *trolls.*
For the newbie: A troll is a person who joins a newsgroup with the
intention of stirring up trouble between the participants of this
group, in the form of an attack on the main topic of the newsgroup.
This very group is called /comp.os.linux.advocacy/ and is dedicated to
promoting Gnu/Linux, both technically - as an operating system - and
ideologically - i.e. Gnu/Linux being Free & Open Source Software. It
is therefore a wet-dream target for Win-trolls and Apple-trolls.
For those of you who do not know me from other newsgroups - I use the
same nick in all groups - I haven't actually been subscribed to
/comp.os.linux.advocacy/ for all that long yet. Not that I wasn't
already an advocate of Free & Open Source Software - from here on
called "FOSS" - before I joined this group, but rather because I was
warned about the reputation of this newsgroup by a few regulars on
other Gnu/Linux-related newsgroups, who actually referred to
/comp.os.linux.advocacy/ as - and I quote - "a sewer"...
If the above shocks or offends you, then know that I am merely quoting
what others had told me; I am in no way saying that this group really
_is_ a sewer. In fact, I see many of the names here that I used to see
on /alt.os.linux.mandrake,/ and they are the names of respectable
people whose posts I appreciate.
It is however quite evident that - more than any other Gnu/Linux-related
newsgroup I'm subscribed to - this very newsgroup here is (becoming?) a
second home to many trolls - be it Win-trolls or Apple-trolls - because
of its very existence as an advocacy group. One could therefore more
accurately describe this newsgroup as "a demilitarized zone", with
terrorists sneaking in. ;-)
Apparently, trolls are all people who consider Gnu/Linux and FOSS to be
some kind of *threat* to them. They will post lies or half-truths -
i.e. twisted facts - to this and other Gnu/Linux-related newsgroups
with the intent of spreading Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt - from here on
called "FUD" - among the Gnu/Linux newbies, or with the intent of
simply raising a few people's blood pressure levels as their idea of a
good time.
It must however be pointed out to the newbie (and serve as a reminder to
the more seasoned Gnu/Linux users) that no matter how well any of us
refute the untruths and half-truths spoken by such trolls, the trolls
themselves already seem to have fallen victim to their *own* FUD, as
they seem to direct their attacks onto aspects of the IT landscape that
fall beyond the scope of what Gnu/Linux and FOSS stand for.
So they are obviously afraid of something; something that Gnu/Linux
would cause to happen or would cause to get exposed...
From my experiences, I discern three very distinct trolling techniques,
although others /may/ exist. I will present them here below...
+++++
*[1]* _*The*_ _*"Windows-is-so-much-better"*_ _*Argument*_
This kind of posts usually attempts to discredit the technical quality
of Gnu/Linux, and to a smaller extent of other FOSS products such as
Mozilla FireFox, Mozilla Thunderbird, et al. This section therefore
makes up for the biggest chunk of text in this /little/ post of mine,
but I think it's quite an important read for every newbie... ;-)
While it is true that every operating system and every software product
contains bugs and flaws - after all, the people who write up that code
are only human - it is a given fact that FOSS products are of a
substantially higher quality than proprietary software products.
Proprietary software products - like Microsoft Windows, Microsoft
Office, et al - are being written by people who do so to make a living
for themselves (and/or their family members) - speaking of the actual
software developers, that is; I won't be addressing business strategies
or large-scale corporate objectives here.
In other words, the developers of proprietary software usually only
develop their code on a nine-to-five basis. There is less commitment
to creativity and perfection than with the FOSS developers, who write
up their software on a voluntarily basis and with their fullest
motivation and enthusiasm.
Additionally, proprietary software has commercial intentions. It is not
intended to work flawlessly or to serve your needs as a system
administrator or a home user - as much as Microsoft _wants_ you to
believe that it is, via their ubiquitous and royally funded advertising
campaigns.
The _prime_ _objective_ behind the development of proprietary software
is to earn money through the *sale* *of* *the* *product* and through
the *after-sales* *support.* Proprietary software such as Microsoft
Windows is a tradeable commodity, and it is specifically being created
for that purpose, so don't let the advertising slogans and the
buzzwords fool you.
Microsoft programmers have already confirmed "off the record" that
Windows typically ships with some 60'000 bugs, of which some 20'000 are
_*fatal*_ to the system's stability and/or integrity. And _this_ is
what _you_ as a user pay big dough for, even if it's "included with
your new computer". You see, what the salesguys usually don't tell you
is that the OEM license for Windows is already included in the price of
the machine.
And yes, let's talk about the license... When you buy a Microsoft
product, you are *licensed* to use that software on one computer -
other licenses exist for larger corporate needs, such as a license on
the number of network connections to a machine.
The above means that the only thing you actually *own* is the CD(-set)
or DVD that the software came on, along with the booklet and the box it
came in, if any. You *do* _*not*_ *own* *the* *software,* and you are
*not* *allowed* to modify it, not even for an improvement in the way
the software works on your own hardware! _Note:_ Applying personal
preferences such as wallpapers or color schemes is not a modification.
Free & Open Source Software on the other hand - there is a small
difference in the licensing between "Free Software" and "Open Source
Software", but they largely represent the same thing - are created by
enthusiasts - who are by no means amateurs; they are actually mostly
engineers - and is being scrutinized and even patched for better
security, stability and/or functionality before a Gnu/Linux distributor
decides to include the software as part of its distribution.
Considering the enthusiasm and creative spirit of the FOSS developers,
these people are highly committed to writing better software than
what's commercially available. They simply want their software to
work, and they go to great lengths to get there.
FOSS developers are happiest when people are using their software or
their code, and they want to exchange code with other developers so as
to improve on the codebase and make it as perfect as possible. These
people are artists, not merchants, and they want to be allowed to share
that code with other developers, or to tweak the code written by
others. _This_ is what the word "free" in Free Software stands for:
freedom!
Next to all of the above, there is yet another important difference
between Gnu/Linux and Microsoft Windows. This difference lies in the
design of both platforms.
Microsoft Windows was originally developed as a GUI-oriented add-on for
MS-DOS. Next to offering a more user-friendly graphical interface to
MS-DOS, it allowed the user to more or less run multiple applications
concurrently - a principle known as /multi-tasking/ - and allowed for
all of the memory in the computer to be used, whereas DOS itself could
only access 640 KB of physical memory and had no knowledge whatsoever
about paging the memory contents to a hard disk. DOS actually only
started supporting hard disks themselves from version 3.00 on. ;-)
Originally, Windows used a multi-tasking scheduling known as
"cooperative multi-tasking", which was very similar to the
multi-tasking on the MacIntosh operating systems of the same era, i.e.
the applications decided how many CPU-cycles they would use up before
they would pass on the CPU to other tasks.
Later on the multi-tasking aspect of Windows was changed to a
"preemptive" model - i.e. not the application but the operating system
kernel decides how much CPU time is given to each process - and Windows
became an independent operating system, in the sense that it didn't
require MS-DOS to be installed separately anymore.
Again a bit later, Windows shifted from relying on a built-in MS-DOS to
being based upon a new type of kernel, known as the New Technology
kernel - from here on referred to as "NT" ;-). Along with the shifting
to this newer 32-bit kernel, Windows also begot some add-ons that
allowed it to function as a server.
The essence of Windows however still is an end-user appliance that does
not fully utilize the power of the underlying hardware and that
restricts the end-user in the ways for performing a certain task.
The server functionality of Windows is just an add-on, regardless of how
extensive it may be, or how extensive Microsoft wants businesses to
believe, and the functionality is seriously crippled by the existence
of Windows as a GUI-only system - with a very limited and emulated
commandline interface - and by its licensing, which prohibits anyone
from modifying the system's binary code or design.
Windows has poor memory management - particularly where it concerns the
paging of memory to the hard disk - and has no security built-in unless
the NTFS filesystem is used. This filesystem - as well as the /vfat/
filesystem, otherwise known to Windows users as "FAT32" - severely
fragments over a very short period of time, inducing severe stability
and performance penalties.
Windows also needlessly uses Remote Procedure Calls - also known as
"RPC" - for internal inter-process communication, which greatly renders
the system vulnerable to cracking attacks from the outside. Thus
arises the absolute *_need_* for Windows users to install a firewalling
application or invest in a hardware firewall.
For long, Windows users had to rely on third party software to hunt down
viruses, spyware, keyloggers, browser hijackers and other malware, to
defragment the filesystem, to clean up the Registry from unwanted keys
- some of which were solely put in place to ensure the proper
enforcement of software licenses, e.g. remnants of trial versions which
would prevent you from re-installing the software after its trial
period had expired - and to block hazardous network traffic - i.e. the
firewall.
Microsoft has in the meantime absorbed or duplicated some of those tools
and is now offering them to the user directly - either shipped with
Windows or shipped as a bonus within a Service Pack - or indirectly
among the downloadable software at the Microsoft website. Thusfar
Microsoft Windows, no matter what trolls may say.
Gnu/Linux on the other hand is a UNIX clone. It looks, feels and
behaves itself towards the users and towards its installed programs as
a UNIX system. It uses the proven UNIX architecture, although it was
written from scratch, and it aims for compliance with the POSIX
standards and the Single UNIX Specification.
To cut a long story short, GNU was written from scratch in 1984 by
Richard M. Stallman - the founder and president of the Free Software
Foundation - and his friends, as a Free Software UNIX clone. Its
native kernel - a microkernel - is called the "Mach kernel" - and a set
of userspace services known as "the Hurd".
_Note:_ The kernel is the central part of an operating system. It
manages the process scheduling, the memory and the I/O. Monolithic
kernels also manage the hardware. Microkernels leave this aspect to
userspace drivers, i.e. drivers that run in the CPU's lowest privilege
mode. All modern microprocessors have four privilege level /rings,/
numbered from 0 (highest) to 3 (lowest). All modern operating systems
only use /rings/ 0 (kernelspace) and 3 (userspace).
The GNU operating system was a complete and "production-ready" platform,
except for one thing...: the Hurd was far from ready and far from
stable for a long time. It has in the meantime reached
production-level quality and a Gnu/Hurd operating system can be freely
downloaded from the Debian website, for those of you who might be
interested. Be sure to read the documentation first! ;-)
Considering that "RMS" - as Richard Stallman calls himself - and his
friends had no commercial interests, they also never committed
themselves to promoting their GNU operating system via advertising.
Instead, they only chose to promote the ideology itself, which helped
the community grow and helped further development of the system.
In 1991, Linus Benedict Torvalds was studying at the University of
Helsinki. He was actually originally using /Minix/ - a UNIX-like
operating system developed by Professor Alan Tannenbaum for educational
purposes only - on his own i386 computer.
In order to better study the instructionset of the Intel 80386 CPU he
had one in his own machine, Linus Torvalds started off writing a
monolithic UNIX-style kernel for it from scratch, hereby using the GNU
tools such as /glibc/ and /gcc./ He had also attended a symposium by
Richard Stallman, and he decided to release his kernel under the terms
and conditions of the GNU General Public License - usually referred to
as "the GPL". :-)
Linus Torvalds originally intended to call his kernel "Freax" - "FREa
uniX" - but his friends - whom he had shared his code with and who had
helped him in its further development - found it more appropriate to
name it after Linus himself. Hence the name "Linux".
So, it was Linus Torvalds who wrote Linux, the kernel. The rest of the
operating system however all came from the GNU project, which itself
didn't have a production-ready kernel. Hence "Gnu/Linux". Soon, other
Free Software was added on to provide for a complete distribution - I
may be wrong, but I think /Slackware/ was the first real distro - and
the rest is history... ;-)
Being a UNIX clone, Gnu/Linux was built from the ground up with security
features such as permission masks, file ownerships and extended file
attributes, all along the UNIX tradition. UNIX as an architecture was
first developed in the late 1960's by Thomson and Ritchie at AT&T - but
originally just so they could play games on an unused PDP-11 in their
spare time - and was already a production-ready operating system by the
early 1970's, i.e. long before MS-DOS, and even before CP/M, of which
MS-DOS was an improved version.
UNIX systems are multi-tasking, /multi-threading/ - i.e. they can split
up running processes into smaller sections called "threads" and use
those for their time-slicing - _and_ they are /multi-user/ systems.
This means that they are intended to have more than one user being
logged into the system at the same time, performing different tasks.
_Note:_ The NT-based versions of Windows are also multi-threading, but
Windows is actually an end-user-oriented platform and so its server,
security and multi-user functionalities are not part of its design.
They are added on as additional layers on top of the base design,
contrary to what is the case in UNIX operating systems.
UNIX originally ran on mainframes and minicomputers, and was later on
ported to the microcomputer, when that architecture begot a
sufficiently powerful CPU. The UNIX design is a complete client/server
architecture - i.e. a whole network within one physical computer system
- and even in the workstation market, it has been the preferred
platform for software development, scientific and medical research and
analysis for many, many years.
Just to give you an example: the animated movies "Shrek", "Shrek 2" and
"Final Fantasy" as well as the dinosaurs in "Jurassic Park" were
created on supercomputers - i.e. clusters of inter-connected computers
that distribute their computing over all connected systems - that were
all running and governed by Gnu/Linux... I may again be wrong, but I
seem to remember that George Lucas also opted for Gnu/Linux clusters
for the rendering of the sci-fi scenes in his last three "Star Wars"
movies. ;-)
Just as with the commercially vended UNIX platforms, Gnu/Linux has been
time-proven to be suitable for mission-critical environments. Its
stability, power, flexibility, versatility, maintainability,
reliability, portability and scalability are already world-renowned -
no matter what any troll tells you. So it's far from being an underdog
or an insignificant hobby project.
Gnu/Linux has already been ported to just about every existing hardware
architecture out there; from wristwatches, PDA's, GPS systems and other
embedded devices over personal computers, professional high-end
workstations and servers, up to minicomputers, clustered
supercomputers, and even IBM mainframes like the S/390.
The above may already seem like an endlessly long list of facts to you -
well... it is, actually **lol** - but still it is only a *small*
excerpt from the enormous difference in design between Microsoft
Windows and Gnu/Linux.
The only thing you can say at most in relation to a technical comparison
between these two platforms, is that they can both be found runing on
the same hardware, i.e. the IA32, IA64 and x86-64 architectures.
The commercial nature of Microsoft Windows, the many non-disclosure
collaborations between Microsoft and other software (and hardware)
vendors and the resulting fact that the Linux kernel developers
actually have to go out and buy the latest hardware in order to
reverse-engineer it and whence develop a driver are the very reasons as
to why some hardware is simply not supported in Gnu/Linux just yet.
But just because it isn't supported _yet_ doesn't mean that it won't be
supported at some time soon. ;-)
Windows is by far not a better operating system than Gnu/Linux. Not
quality-wise, not ideology-wise and certainly not design-wise. In
fact, the contrary is all the more true.
However, Gnu/Linux is not, was not, and never will be a competitor for
Microsoft Windows. The very origin of the two systems and their
intrinsic designs are _completely_ different. This is also why
Gnu/Linux newbies should not demand that Gnu/Linux _becomes_ like
Windows in this or that aspect.
Some people like cats, others like dogs, but nobody goes off buying a
cat with the expectation that it'll behave like a dog, or vice versa.
By the same token, the rebuttal about the alleged user-unfriendliness
of Gnu/Linux is moot. If you want the power at your fingertips, you
have to be willing to learn how to use that power. Nobody can expect
to fly the Space Shuttle just because he's got a driver's license for a
sedan with an automatic transmission.
This all said, what you yourself think or feel would be the appropriate
operating system for your computer is _*your*_ choice, not ours and not
anybody else's...
_*That*_ is what Free Software is all about... ;-)
+++++
*[2]* _*The*_ _*Market-Share-and-Support*_ _*Argument*_
This one is a little shorter than the above chunk of text, but
nevertheless a favored trolling issue.
In the previous chapter, I have already mentioned that Microsoft has
certain non-disclosure deals with other proprietary software
developers, and even with hardware developers.
As a result of the latter, lots of hardware lacks support in Gnu/Linux.
The first reason for this is that the hardware vendors still consider
Gnu/Linux as something unimportant, just because it doesn't have a
(concrete) corporate (and thus legally liable) name behind it. After
all, Microsoft will always be around and will always be domineering the
end-user market. Or so the hardware vendors think.
Yet, many large corporations have already sided up with the Gnu/Linux
developers - for whatever reasons they may have, of course; it surely
isn't out of the kindness of their hearts. ;-) Such corporations are
IBM, HP, Novell and SGI, Sun Microsystems, Transmeta, Intel, AMD and
others.
In addition to the above, it is also noteworthy that Microsoft is
currently losing a great deal of its government support in other
countries than the USA. Many government administrations previously
relying on Microsoft and its products are now making the switch to
Gnu/Linux and other FOSS products.
The second reason for Microsoft's dominance on the desktop is that
Microsoft actually makes anti-FOSS deals with certain hardware vendors
- e.g. in the brandname PC market - ensuring that their hardware can
only fully be used with Windows.
Everyone with a critical eye on advertising and marketing can tell how
aggressively Microsoft attempts to gain the full 100% on each market.
Their position as a multinational and their very clever marketing
techniques - e.g. the embedding of IE/OE into the NT kernel - leaves
the end-user with very little incentive - other than security or
stability flaws - to try and use anything other than what Microsoft
presents them with.
The monopoly position of Microsoft is also detectable in other areas
than the operating system debate. For instance, I happen to be running
an IRC network with a couple of friends, and while IRC was still a very
popular medium a few years ago, the inclusion of MSN in Windows has
severely damaged that popularity...
Yet another factor in regards to popularity is the media, and by this
I'm not referring to the IT-related media, but rather to normal,
everyday journalism. This usually focuses on the political and
economic events in the world, not on IT, and so when something
IT-related deserves being reported in the news broadcasts on TV
stations or in a column in a newspaper - e.g. as with a dangerous virus
or worm - the journalists are far from educated on the subject and will
typically not even know that there is such a thing as Gnu/Linux unless
one of their sources explicitly refers to it as being "an alternative
operating system platform". _Note:_ Don't you hate that word
"alternative"? That's like saying that there's such a thing as a
"standard operating system"... **shake head** ;-)
Contrary to Windows, Gnu/Linux - although commercially vended by certain
distributions - does not force any particular application or tool onto
the user, and even supplies multiple but slightly different tools to
perform the same task.
See, the best way of thinking about Gnu/Linux - and UNIX in general - is
as a huge toolbox; you pick what you need or like for whatever it is
you want to do, and if you want something complex done fast, you
combine the tools into a script. Plenty of languages to choose from:
Bourne shell, Korn shell, C shell, Perl, Python, Ruby, etc. But I
digress, so let me return to the subject... ;-)
Commercial distributions are businesses and therefore do advertise.
They hope to win back some of the market share currently taken (and
aggressively/arrogantly defended) by Microsoft. They can however not
spend the same large amount on advertising and lobbying as a
multinational like Microsoft can, and considering the very ideology
behind Gnu/Linux, the distributors don't intend to play it dirty, even
if Microsoft does, e.g. by designing websites so that they can only be
viewed with IE. After all, if they were to do that, they wouldn't be
any better than that which they are trying to expose.
So what about the numbers? Does Microsoft have the largest share in the
desktop market? Yes, it does. Unmistakably! Do they earn that?
Considering the poor design and quality of their products, considering
their unfair alliances and monopolist techniques, the answer is "No,
they do not."
Will they keep their grip on this market? We don't know, and we don't
really care. All we care about is that we can hold on to our freedom
to choose another operating system than that which Microsoft and its
grunts dictate.
But how about the server market? Is it really true that Microsoft
dominates that one too? No, not by a long shot! Most server systems
connected to the Internet are running proprietary UNIX, Gnu/Linux or
one of the Open Source BSD's, i.e. FreeBSD - which is also used as the
basis for Apple's OS X - NetBSD or OpenBSD.
Microsoft does own a large percentage of the server market, but not even
half of it. Another, smaller section of the server market still relies
on Novell's Netware, possibly uses some older VMS system or may be
using the server version of Apple's OS X. These numbers are
negligible, though.
However, as I pointed out in the first chapter already: as Gnu/Linux is
all about freedom and has nothing to do with any commercial interests -
short of the commercial distribution vendors - the argument about
market shares is actually moot.
The point is not to gain market shares, the point is to bring the
message across that there still is something else out there but what
Microsoft and other proprietary vendors want you to believe, and that
you too can make use of (and contribute to) this technology, and the
Freedom it represents... ;-)
+++++
*[3]* _*The*_ _*Four-Letter-Word*_ _*Trolls*_
This requires the least bit of attention in my already very long
article, but they are here nevertheless... ;-)
We've all seen them already, and frankly, we don't know _why_ they still
bother. Their posts are so stupid and empty that they cannot have come
from anyone who's had a reasonable amount of parental education on
common decency and possesses average or above intelligence.
In other words, they are the kind that will post things like "Linux
sux", "f*ck you, Lintards" and other fine examples of prose. Arguing
with these cretins is a waste of your time, and they are best treated
with a prompt admission to your /killfile./ _Newbie_ _note:_ The
/killfile/ is a filter in your newsreader that filters out such posts,
based upon identities, thread subjects, targeted newsgroups, etc. If
you see someone saying "plonk" to someone else, it means they have
/killfiled/ them.
+++++
Now that the above is all said, the last subject I'm about to talk to in
this article is the phenomenon known as /Flatfish.../
I myself have actually never seen this troll in action under the
pseudonym Flatfish, but I did see references to the /Flatfish/ persona
in the replies to posts from this(/these?) individual(s?) when
he/she/them was/were using other pseudonyms while cross-posting to a
multitude of Gnu/Linux-related newsgroups - one of them being a group I
have already been on long before I to joined /comp.os.linux.advocacy/ -
*ànd* to the infamous /alt.os.windows-xp./
In fact, I have then replied to this troll, setting him/her straight on
the facts, just as I have done a few times now before I finally decided
I'd had enough of the nonsense. The regulars on this group may have
seen those replies being posted here as well.
The above is one of the main reasons why I finally decided to join
/comp.os.linux.advocacy/ in the first place. I feel that it is
important that we stand up to these trolls, because they are totally
distorting the very essence of this and other Gnu/Linux-related
newsgroups, and of the Free Software Foundation and the Open Source
Initiative themselves.
This all said, here are the entries I have in my /killfile/ regarding
this character... :
- ***@yahoo.com
- ***@yahoo.com
- ***@yahoo.com
- ***@yahoo.com
The first three entries were instated when this character decided to
cross-post to /alt.os.linux.mandrake,/ i.e. before I was subscribed to
/comp.os.linux.advocacy./
In the meantime, we have also already seen this troll as a number of
female characters such as Laura, Susan and Lisa - my latest /killfile/
addition - and possibly others, but I've got a mild migraine right now
so I can't really remember. ;-)
The different identities all represent the same (group of) person(s), as
there are some unmistakable analogies...
(1) Each time, the pseudonym matches the first half of the
e-mail address and contains underscores to separate the words
or firstname and lastname. Flatfish will surely change that
now... ;-)
(2) The e-mail address is a Yahoo webmail account, freshly
created a few hours or a day before the initial post from the
new identity.
(3) The poster starts two to four new threads in a timespan
of only a few hours and will follow up on some of the replies,
even posting a reply to him-/herself with a seemingly honest
complaint about our alleged rudeness, et al.
(4) A number of the "whines" returns in each post, e.g. the
argument of Windows software being used in schools or the
complaint that this or that hardware gadget - which was most
likely designed for Windows - will not work in Gnu/Linux.
(5) Sooner or later, the poster will start accusing us of being
zealots, nerds, geeks, and of not having a life, et al.
(6) The assault comes out of nothing, does its thing with great
fire and activity, and then dies again, all in a maximum
timespan of two days but often shorter.
(7) The individual behind these posts does know something about
IT, but by far not enough to substantiate any claims made. It
is most likely that he/she gets his/her inspiration from doing
a few Google searches for reports on the current state of
affairs in the "Microsoft versus FOSS" debate, and/or from
lurking on Gnu/Linux-related newsgroups, taking notes of the
problems encountered.
(8) Much of what this poster says will sooner or later conflict
with things he/she said earlier on while posting under the same
identity.
+++++
Thusfar this very long post of mine... As I said in my introduction,
this article was directed at both the newbies and the seasoned
Gnu/Linux users, although I chose to take out a bigger effort in aiming
more at the former category of readers. :-)
I sincerely hope that I haven't bored you people with this huge chunk of
text, and that I've managed to adequately explain what Gnu/Linux is
(and is not) about. I do however expect the Windows zealots to eagerly
jump to the occasion, since I've managed to tackle a few of their
arguments... ;-)
I wish to thank everyone who managed to read through this long post from
beginning to end without falling asleep, developing a headache or
turning into a werewolf (or any combination hereof). :-þ
_*Endnote:*_ Anything written in this post may be reproduced verbatim or
by reference elsewhere according to the terms and conditions of the
Creative Commons License. ;-)
--
With kind regards,
*Aragorn*
(Registered Gnu/Linux user #223157)
With kind regards,
*Aragorn*
(Registered Gnu/Linux user #223157)