The Penguin Doesn't Fly, Avoid Linux

[glennzo]

Did this guy actually graduate from law school?
http://legaltech.law.com/commentary-the-penguin-do.html

Read this one next.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?s...80809033233244
Picture a war movie where the kamikaze gets shot down as he approaches a battle ship.

Send me $100 and I'll send you a degree by return of post

Wayne

[glennzo]

If I call now, with credit card in hand, will you double the offer and send me not 1 but 2 degrees? I assure you that I'm over 18 years of age.

[Dangermouse]

The first couple of paragraphs was enough for me , cant really comment because it would be politically incorrect/rude and get me banned , so i just leave it at that of course it does mean that everything on that site is also complete rubbish

[scottro]

My guess, especially as the author is apparently a lawyer, is that he was getting paid by someone for something here.

Otherwise, I would have thought it satire. There was a fellow called Tristran on the shelleytherepublican site, which is all satire--and clever enough to remove all signs that it is a satirical site. At one point, there was a mention of it on the site, but they've taken that down and even taken down the sites that mention it's satire. I think they figure, if anyone takes it seriously, they deserve it.
At any rate, the author Tristran wrote a pro MS anti Linux article. All through, he gave you hints that it was a joke. The funniest part, like an Ali G interview, was reading the comments of the people who were taking it seriously. Finally, I felt sorry for them (as I sometimes did for Ali G subjects--though watching him ask a professional basketball player, "How hard do I have to work out to get as tall as you?" wasn't one of them) and posted my own comments, pointing out the hints he gave. At the end, the last line seemed to me to be saying, "And if you're too silly to realize this is satire, here is the giveway." It complained about Linux's lack of DRM.

http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/...the-facts.aspx

[JN4OldSchool]

The funny part is there is more than a kernel of truth in everything the guy says! I dont think it is a joke, and he is sadly misinformed in every area, but then again, so are most of the people who come through here. I also agree that as a lawyer Linux is NOT for him. Not unless he had an interest in it for Linux's sake anyway. I do not object to his article, in fact I see it as part of the big fence that is still managing to keep the world's huddled masses (read idiots) out of our garden! Like another of my favorite subjects, Linux is free for the taking. No strings attached, it is just a download away. It has the power to change your life. Yet people fight it...Why? Even if it was a joke, what would prompt someone to go to such lengths to bash something they obviously do not understand? Why the urge? Is it to keep people away, or is it an attempt to strike back at something they couldnt figure out? Why not just shrug off Linux and walk away? I dont like Barbie dolls. Never have. But I dont make it my life's crusade to bash Barbie.

And Scottro, if Redmond actually does support efforts like this then I feel really sorry for the person/people driving the effort. Linux must really scare them. It shouldnt because most people do not have the interest to make it work. For most they probably equate the OS with the PC. They probably dont even realize they have a choice. Windows came on it when they bought it and they wouldnt want to void the warranty. Never mind the fact that it took a few days to figure the new fangled Vista thing out. Forget having to figure out Linux. I mean, the menu is even on top!

Hey, to the lawyer who wrote that misinformed rant: Thank you brother. You are our insurance against people looking for a free ride.

To the people who will read that and agree: Stay away! If you do not have enough common sense to research a potential new OS you are about to install then you deserve what you are about to get! If you do not understand what Linux is and cannot see past that blog then you really dont want to go here. Stay with Windows. The world runs on Windows, you will always find a driver for your peripheral, help is always just a phone call away, you are fully supported, and you have probably used the OS since birth. If money is the only object in looking at Linux then forget it. You will save nothing in the long run. You will put way more work into it then it will be worth to you.

At the rest of the people who want to try Linux because it intrigues them: Welcome aboard! Never mind that blog. It contains some truths, but they are highly exaggerated. Linux is indeed ready for you! You will have a bit of work getting acclimated, there will be a few new things to learn. But dont let that blog fool you, I have been using Linux for years and MIGHT know 10 bash commands!!! Step aboard, lets spin this puppy up, and if you dont like it you are always free to leave. It is no disgrace and we will just pat you on the back, thank you for trying and welcome you back whenever you might wish to try again. Linux is NOT for everyone!

[scottro]

I have mixed feelings about JN4's post. In part, I greatly agree with every word he said, yet, then I think Ubuntu is also taking a good approach, thinking out of the box so to speak, lowering the bar--because, that, I believe, aids us in getting hardware support. Yes, the fellow was misinformed--it makes one wonder if a friend gave him a Gentoo stage one install disk.

[Dan]

Hmmmm.

The man says he could not even successfully handle Puppy! Cripes! I sure wouldn't want to admit that in print!

I also note he completely eschewed any commercially supported version of Linux. While I will readily admit that in order to actually practice law, you must be able to selectively and completely turn your back on reality and the basics of common sense ... his inability to grapple with a clear and logical chain of thought marks him clearly as exactly what he is. A Windows user who is totally disinterested in changing his ways.

If you are looking for a parchment shingled pressed shirt to punch out boilerplate paperwork, he's your man! If you're looking for someone with passion, zeal and creativity ... probably better head back to the yellow pages. (Try looking under any of the following headings: Barnacle, shark, vulture etc.)

<....>

[YeOK]

In fact, no Linux distributions would install on any computers that were 6 years or older in my office -- Linux required too much computing power. For those computers that were 3-5 years old, Linux required fooling with the BIOS settings and the partitions to the filing system, jobs wished on no one

From that comment, its clear he is not paying for IT staff. In that case, he will find Windows a better option, simply because he knows how to use it.

[stevea]

More like "The Lawyer can't read". As Groklaw points out - this guy got plenty of on-line help but ignored it. Lawyers, like debaters, are trained to make the strongest most biased possible case in favor of their (client's) position and that is exactly how this article reads. They are not trying to make a balanced and fair assessments, as technologists must daily. Perhaps this is why a Congress full of lawyers is such a mess.

As I dissect the article I see that (IMO) 60-80% of the problems are the authors attitude.

He initially admits a problem with relative unfamiliarity with Linux, but then as he has problems with installation, configuration he whines (falsely according to Groklaw) about lack of support. He did not bother to compare the support he would receive for Windows. The reality is that this guy no doubt has been using and learning MS Win products for 15 years, has accumulated a LOT of tricks for installation and config and he is uncomfortable in the new and entirely different environment. His major problem and 50% of his complaint is his subjective bias toward the familiar and long background with Windows.

I seriously doubt that to a naive audience Vista is easier to install and learn than Ubuntu.
His subjective assessment that Lin GUIs are clunky" is the opposite of mine. MS GUIs are functional and stodgy. 3rd party package GUIs on Win vary from great to aweful, but many are quite different in style to the MS products. As many complaints as I have with Gnome - the GUIs are reasonably well integrated and consistent; better tha nmy experience w MS-Windows. KDE was designed as more of an open framework so there is less consistency - by design. Illuminati and other simple desktops are clean as an OR - sweet and light, but barebones. A desktop for every need - not the MS-Win one-size-fits-all approach.

His claim the Windows-OS has an embedded cost of only $75 and will run on a refurb'ed $219 PC is absurd. He is missing the point that his refurb will run like a snail even in the unlikely event that Vista installs. The memory needed might cost more than $219! Then there are the eventual updates to the next OS and next MS-office and the planned obsolescence of each OS and office product and the endless list of required 3rd party packages - Partition Magic and Norton Ghost and XXX anti-virus for example. These expensive but trivial packages only exist because of the closed environment.

He claims he must resort to the command line ... As a test last year I installed Fedora (7?) and configured the system entirely from GUI tools - user accounts, package installation & configuration, network config ... . I personally prefer using emacs across the config files but it's entirely possible to install and setup a Fedora system without ever resorting to a shell prompt. I imagine that Ubuntu or Freespire and others are far better at this than Fedora.

This guy seems absolutely clueless in his choice of distros. What sort of moron would ever think of using Puppy Linux for a law office system ? He has a single complaint abt Ubuntu, but then we expect he's lying about lack of support as he lied about Mandriva support.

He is either vastly ignorant or openly lying about some package features. The few specific cases he cites are false. OOffice has had envelope addressing for years, perhaps forever; for example.

Another outright lie is wrt security. Windows attempts security through obscurity, not Linux. Only a few thousand Redmond developers have access to Vista and app source, but millions have access to Linux source. We both have security bugs, but Linux problems are found and
addressed more readily. In addition Windows, unlike Linux, historically has ignored major security issues in their designs.

==
Now for the points where he has a valid complaint:

Many of the major Open packages run nicely on Windows - FF, OO, Thunderbird, Gimp.
Windows comes pre-installed for a modest cost, while the time taken to install/config Linux can exceed any savings.
His staff(self) are probably more familiar w /Win tools and so there is a costly learning curve for Linux.
The Linux packages are a "bag of parts" rather than a "well integratned whole". In honesty only the MS packages are well-integrated in the Win environment.
Windows has far fewer hardware dependencies. I'd like to think Lin is catching up, but clearly we aren't there yet.
==

He ignores is that there are vastly greater capabilities with Linux. Even an end-user distro like Ubuntu can match or exceed the functional features of WindowsServer. Has anyone setup a webmail server on Vista home version ?
I haven't used Windows in years, but they clearly were trailing in the virtualization, server apps, security and basic extensibility, encrypted file systems.

Extensibility is an interesting topic. On Linux wiith a little shell/python script and use of tools like rsync, mail, cron, nc (netcat), ssh - and a handful of others you can do some pretty astonishing things. Automated backup, automated downloads, email notifications, build & install the latest kernel nightly, secure proxy tunnel to remote LANs for web/mail access. Even make a crude GUI with zenity. Partiaslly possible on Vista I am sure, but not very simple I think.

Also ignored is that Linux tools generally adhere to *real* standards, while MS purposely promotes proprietary versions of everything - causing the "lock in" problem that prevents switching.

=====
The author is a clone, but he does have a few valid points.

[stevea]

Originally Posted by JN4OldSchool

Why not just shrug off Linux and walk away? I dont like Barbie dolls. Never have. But I dont make it my life's crusade to bash Barbie.

You knocked that ball out of the park, JN4. Apparently some ppl feel threatened by what other ppl believe. There a lot of political and religious implications to this - but I'll leave that hand-grenade alone today. I find that attitude puzzling and dismal.

This guy obviously has a vested interest in Windows and feels threatened by Linux. Linux is frankly NOT ready to replace Windoze in the average office. Heck - Vista isn't even ready to replace XP in the office. OTOH I have worked in small and medium sized companies (15-200 ppl), companies big enough to have 1+ IT ppl, where Linux was the default and worked very well. Remote admin seems to be less of a problem than the old-school IT attitude that it's their responsibility to prevent users from having any power and getting things done. OTOH power users can be a headache for IT and corporate security.

[YeOK]

I also just noticed, he states he uses Avast for free. However, Avast is only free for home use. Not for business. Seems like he is grabbing at straws, or he is not paying for the Avast software in the office.

He can always defend himself in court though, should Avast hear about it.

[scipio90]

The fact that he uses freeware and free software as synonyms seems to suggest he hasn't done much research.

routine files are placed in folders buried no less than eight layers down in the directory tree, with a pathname like \\home\arklinux\hdc\usr\share\My Documents\clientname\clientproject\documentname.

I don't know a whole lot about FHS or anything about the distros he mentions, but isn't that path just gibberish?

800-page list of computer commands

What's he referring to by this?

[Hlingler]

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers". - William Shakespeare, Henry VI (Part 2) (Act IV, Scene II).

V

[forkbomb]

Originally Posted by scipio90

What's he referring to by this?

The big question is, "where can I get it?" Reading those disorganized man pages gets a little tiring.

Somebody mentioned the biggest, most important part - the first two paragraphs (all I could stomach, 1) because it was obvious he's misinformed, and 2) the author's a boring writer who writes like he's in high school) - treat "free software" and "freeware" as synonyms.

A lawyer should know better. Even if he's not a copyright or IP lawyer, he's capable of informing himself.*

The failure of a lawyer to make that distinction is a solid indication the guy's talking out of his ass about something of which he knows nothing.

End of story.

* I should say some of the Linux zealots out there feed into muddying these waters and blurring the line, and it's a problem that causes all sorts of misconceptions. But this is a lawyer we're talking...