David A. wrote:
> BUT.. There is some sour itchy feelings regarding some plicy/political
> stuff and diffrences in opinion. I've also felt "debian morale" going
> down. But my impression is that the huge bulk, the big momentum of
> Debian keeps on turning and monving in the right direction. No "medium
> size conflicts" risk jepordizing the big projekt.
I guess I'll get sucked into this, 'cause I see something here that
piques my interest now.
I don't think it's just Debian's morale that's low -- the "hype"
surrounding Linux overall is down, the real world problems of operating
Linux in business have cooled the general hub-bub about Linux and
desktop users are finding that an OS that's built to "just work" suits
most people's needs better than an OS or desktop that you have to hack
on to get it to do what you want.
Even mutltiple millions of dollars thrown at the problem (Mark
Shuttleworth/Ubuntu) still hasn't really addressed the underlying
hardware/driver support issues from manufacturers, and the other
licensing problems inherent in the system.
Linux still has (and mostly seems to want to keep) that "hacker feel"
(the traditional sense of the term hacker, of course) and that makes it
wholly inappropriate for some environments. Always will.
There are a chosen few who work on really professional level Linux
development, including the majority of the kernel coders these days --
most of the core people are paid to work on it.
But the Linux "desktop" is still quite a joke, really -- compared with
the benefits companies have from sticking to Windows environments or
even Macs.
I love my Linux machines and all their "fun" desktop options, but the
damn things just aren't even close to the standardization and usability
of the commercially available alternatives, really.
Would I recommend Linux desktops for certain business uses, heck yeah...
but being a Unix "geek" for work means that my pidgeon-hole is at the
servers in the back room, and my influence on desktop decisions at my
organization (and virtually every organization I've worked for)
realistically is nil.
The Windows kids will always get their way as the "desktop experts"
around here.
And I find that okay, I have plenty of work to do keeping the back-room
(where the real money is made) running.
Debian does a great job sticking to their guns about things being
DSFG-Free or they won't be in main... but people don't understand it and
don't like when their shiny new hardware does not work. Hell even their
three or four year old hardware doesn't work (802.11 cards, anyone?).
Not "right out of the box" anyway.
Debian also does a great job releasing a real STABLE distro that really
is STABLE, but people want shiny new software toys there too, and get
frustrated at the release cycle.
But explaining this to newbies isn't something I feel like doing
anymore. I did it for years... now I just hand them an Ubuntu disc and
say, "If that loads up correctly on your hardware, you'll probably find
that fun. Holler if it doesn't, I'll see if I can help." And leave it
at that. I used to do it with Debian CD's, but that's far more painful.
I love Debian for my servers, but I'll stick with my Mac for a desktop
for the time being. That may be helping some "evil empire" somewhere in
California instead of Washington State, but the thing "just works" when
I open the lid.
Sure, I also have a Linux laptop that took many weeks of hacking to get
it to a similar place, and it still crashes on resume from suspend once
in a while. It's just not "there" yet, and I'm of the belief that as
long as Linux remains a "hacker OS", it never will be.
Things will keep changing, great new ideas will form and dissolve, and
the desktop on that machine will always be morphing, doing neat things,
and generally not stable.
Lots of Linux "folk" push the Linux desktop "dream" and various other
things, and/or are highly involved in their own self-interests. It's
both what makes Linux great and also what makes it annoying to some
extent.
And it leads to some VERY heated and/or silly discussions on mailing
lists. Every topic brought up in this thread dates back to when I
started using Linux in 1994 or 1995, and not a single one of them has
changed over the years... but people still ask "why the attitude" type
questions about once every six months on almost all Linux mailing lists
I'm on.
The Linux attitude just "is". Over time we "oldsters" accept it and
learn to ignore it, trying not to proliferate it too much so we can keep
using our favorite distro or tools and stay out of the flamefests. The
"newbies" wander in from time to time and wonder what the HELL is going
on, and then slowly assimilate it and figure it out.
Just like in real life, if you avoid the annoying people, you get more
done and you're happier about 99% of the time.
So that's my thoughts on the matter. Not that they amount to a "hill of
beans", as I said, oldsters usually don't even bother to jump into these
discussions - I'm just a glutton for punishment, I guess, this time.
Want REAL attitude? Try OpenBSD. Now THAT's an attitude. (And we'll
leave it up to you to decide if it's good or bad... that's a judgement
call I'm not prepared to discuss on a Linux list! GRIN...)
Better yet, find someone who actually works on mainframes daily and
listen for "attitude"... it's there, subtly telling you that their
systems still run some of the largest data processing in the world,
serious money, serious effort, serious uptime -- similar to the Dilbert
Unix cartoon where the guy with the white hair, suspenders, and a smug
expression says, "Here's a nickel kid, get yourself a better computer.",
and tosses Dilbert a nickel. Mainframe guys and gals are both cool, and
at the same time, somewhat odd. :-)
In the end: None of the attitude matters.
Either the computer does what you need it to do or it doesn't with a
particular software package loaded, or it doesn't. It's a machine.
It's just like an automobile or any other large complex piece of
machinery -- you buy it to do something. If you bought it to play with,
and not do anything useful, and then you spend your days in flamefests
and have "attitude" online about your box full of transistor switches...
you're just wasting your time. Lots of mailing list flamefests abound
about whether Chevy's are better than Fords too. I like to pick on
Fords, but ultimately only I care about what I drive... you really don't
unless you work for Ford or Chevy. :-)
Nate