Linux Zealots
 
Some people just do not understand that technology is a tool, not a religion.  We call these people “Linux Zealots”.
 
To the Linux Zealot, it is absolutely appropriate for everyone on the planet to use Linux for every single task, whether or not it even involves a computer.  In fact, people should redesign non-computer tasks to include a computer, simply so they can do it on Linux.  You know what kind of people I’m talking about.
 
The sad thing is, these Zealots truly believe they’re helping people by making such ludicrous suggestions.  One of the most common reasons they will give to support their suggestion that everyone should use Linux for everything is “you can customize it”, totally forgetting that 99% of all computer users couldn’t care less about “customizing” anything, they just want the damn thing to work!!!
 
Ask anyone what they want to do with their computer, and it usually boils down to these three things:
  1. 1.  Check E-mail
  2. 2.  Browse the ‘Web
  3. 3.  Play multimedia content
 
Do you see “compile my own custom kernel, without IPv6 support, but with patch-o-matic and experimental strings support for iptables--also including the binary-only driver from nVidia, but it’s still better than Microsoft because it’s delivered on the exact same license terms and in the exact same form-factor, only it’s on Linux” ANYWHERE on that list???  I didn’t freakin think so!!!
 
When the Linux Zealot does manage to convince someone to install Linux (or forcibly installs it on someone’s system, as I’ve seen several people proudly claim to have done!) and things don’t work, where does the Zealot place the blame?  Oh, well that’s the user’s fault, of course!  If only the user had spent hours and hours reading 600 page how-to books that cost $50, maybe they wouldn’t have been so stupid as to assume iTunes would work on Linux (or some equally reasonable expectation).
 
At this point, the same Zealot who only hours earlier was professing that everyone in the world should use Linux will suddenly change tact, and snidely remark that they’re “glad the sheep are too dumb to use Linux, because that keeps it pure where only the elite have the privilege of using a superior OS”.  Wow, that doesn’t sound very “open” to me, but these are some comments I’ve actually read in various Linux blogs and on Linux forums.
 
Where can you turn when things are hopelessly broken?  Your only option is Internet message boards or mailing lists, on which you will usually get half a dozen different instructions on how to perform the same task, of which probably 25% are blatantly wrong coming from users who probably know less than you do (but just wanted to get in on the action).
 
The problem with Linux is that there’s no “right” way to do anything.  The basic culture seems to encourage amateurs creating new programs and distributions for everything, not because the new code is better, but simply because “they can”.  The end result is thousands of programs that overlap and duplicate in functionality, most of them written by unprofessional programmers with dubious credentials or education, and the vast majority of them have horrible or non-existent documentation--I can’t figure out which is worse, no documentation, or documentation that’s so poor it just wastes hours of your time for nothing.
 
The epitome of this is the KDE vs. Gnome battle.  Both are graphical user environments, both have neat effects, orderly icon schemes, configuration utilities, menu conventions, and a myriad of supporting widget thingies, all starting with “k” or “g”.  Linux users are equally divided on which one is better.  Here’s a question for you:  Why does it matter???
 
If everyone would have stepped back 5 years ago and said “hey, it doesn’t make sense that we compete with ourselves, why don’t we set out to make a UI that’s just as intuitive as Aqua and standardize the way developers create GUIs for Linux programs”, the whole Linux-on-the-desktop crusade would probably have been up to par in time to race Vista for desktops.  As it is now, the state of Linux on the Desktop is still pretty abysmal.  I just fired up Knoppix the other day, widely regarded as one of the most user-friendly Linux distros, and I had to struggle with KDE for 10 minutes to get my mouse even close to usable as a pointing device.
 
Does Linux really need 10 FTP clients, 15 text editors, 5 browsers, 4 different software package conventions, 2 major desktop environments, 2 bootloaders, 5 file systems, 4 MTAs, 5 IMAP servers, and a partridge in a pear tree?  No!  It just needs one of each that WORK.
 
Linux excels in environments where the customizability is an advantage, such as embedded OSs that drive a wide variety of appliances and mobile devices, or for hosted platforms where extensive hacking possibilities are more of a benefit than standard provisioning tools.
 
To a lesser extent, Linux excels as a UNIX replacement, not because it’s more capable, but because it’s cheaper.  Executives with their eye on the bottom line find Linux attractive in some cases because it drastically reduces their licensing and support costs, as long as they have the expertise on staff to fully support it.  Notice that you don’t see a whole lot of Windows replacements on the Linux front, because it’s a whole different skill set and the cost to retrain staff, or hire more expensive Linux admins off-sets any possible benefit in the reduction of Microsoft licensing fees.
 
Here are the three most harmful things to Linux that have to be fixed if Linux is ever going to be a main-stream, every-day OS:
  1. 1.  RMS and his merry band of GPLv3-thumping fundamentalists.
  2. 2.  Irrational Zealots who recommend Linux and/or Open Source Software as the solution to everything (without even understanding the problem).
  3. 3.  The mentality of “more choices are better” (rather than pooling resources to drive higher quality).
 
Oh yeah, and the next time I see some knuckle-dragging pea-brain brag about how he replaced OS X with Debian on his $3000 MacBook Pro, I’m going to pour my cappuccino on that sucker and tell him I “optimized it for caffein”.  Let’s see him recompile his kernel out of that!
 
Here’s a message for all you budding Linux Zealots:
“Seek first to understand, then to be understood[1].”
 
If you do not understand the problems people are trying to solve, how can you possibly hope to recommend a reasonable and useful solution?  You also need to accept the fact that Linux will not always be an appropriate solution.  If you learn to effectively identify where it’s useful vs. not, you will gain credibility and only then will the general public take Linux seriously.
 
[1]  S. R. Covey, Seven Habits of Highly Effective People.  Free Press, 1989.
 
Things I Loath
Tuesday, January 23, 2007