Feedback

Sometimes I wonder if the people working on key sections of Linux Magazine, such as the[ April 2005] “Shutdown” column[ available online at http://www.linux-mag.com/2005-04/shutdown_01.html], really understand who the “end-user” really is.

Jason Perlow blasts open source developers because he wasn’t able to find an acceptable solution for his problems with Microsoft Windows. I wonder why he thinks it’s up to open source developers to try to reverse engineer proprietary file formats and interoperate with proprietary network protocols. As a GNU/Linux user, I want nothing more than to stop having to mess with the mess that is Microsoft software. I would guess that most open source developers feel the same way.

If Mr. Perlow wants the advantages of using Microsoft Word and Powerpoint, then he should just stick to using Word and Powerpoint. If he wants everyone to share files on a Windows file server, use Windows. However, if he wants the freedom and advantages of open source software, he should be ready to deal with the limitations as well.

Of course, interoperating with a proprietary, closed-source operating system is going to be difficult. If a company isn’t ready to switch to GNU/Linux, why try to force it with half-baked solutions and then blame open source developers? If you really want interoperability, why don’t you petition Microsoft to open their network protocols and file formats and stop placing the blame on people who have worked their collective asses off and donated some really great software to the world?

Migrating Windows desktop users to GNU/Linux desktops before fully evaluating the feasibility of connecting to Windows services seems a bit silly. Perhaps Mr. Perlow should have started with the servers.

I have to agree with Jason Perlow on Linux being able to simply “work.” I have downloaded Crossover Office and Win4Lin Pro, neither of which “work out of the box”. It says Quicken 2005 will work — it loads but does nothing. My MP3 software loads, starts, and then crashes. I want a game-only Microsoft box, but moving key applications to Linux is becoming quite the quest.

Jason, I want to compliment you on your[ April 2005 “Shutdown” column]. Sometimes I get tired of reading all of the pro-Linux “Look how great Linux is” cheerleading when to many of us it’s just a tool like any other operating system. In some ways it’s great and in others it’s a[ pain]. Like anything, Linux has its pros and cons.

Your article was refreshing reading, a real-world article pointing out some of the areas where work still needs to be done.

I just read the April 2005 “Shutdown.” What a breath of fresh air! You hit the nail on the head.

I work at the router level (and was once a Windows system administrator) and have two Linux desktops and one Windows machine. Many of my coworkers are bonkers about Linux, but[ I think] it’s darn hard to work with.

Let’s face it: most everyone in this world can use a Windows machine. They can install, uninstall, and stop services at will. Give them Linux, however, and they quickly glaze over because documentation is poor at best. When it comes to production use, a “Bill Gates Special” wins out simply because[ it’s easier to use].

We live in an age when[ productivity] is valued more and more. If Windows goes whacky, a re-image takes 20 minutes. On the other hand, installing Linux on my wife’s laptop took most of a weekend. If productivity is the goal, then Linux is insufficient for 97% of all computer users.

It was refreshing to see an editorial in a Linux magazine that shined the light of day on some of the unpleasant truths about Linux. The only way that the Linux community is ever going to overcome its hurdles is by honestly accepting that they exist. Until then, Linux will remain a fringe player with a negligible market share across the entire enterprise. And as Apple has already illustrated, being a niche player isn’t safe.