David Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > You bring up a valuable point. I think that the one thing that Linux > lacks, more than anything else, is a single driving vision. Which, in > turn, brings up the question of; should that goal be merely to replace > Windows?
The single driving vision, in the words of ESR, is to scratch a programmer's itch. That has served Linux (and other free software) enormously well. > It's easy to forget why Linux was written in the first place, when we > let ourselves lapse purely into the "Windows versus Linux" mindset. > Linux was written as a freely available alternative to Unix, that could > run on commodity-class computers. That was the goal in the beginning, > but it certainly is not the goal now. The goal now -appears- to be to > replace Windows. Not by Linus. Perhaps by KDE and GNOME developers. And that's certainly not my motivation for using it. I'm a sysadmin. I have a desire to use OS's that suck less than windows. Linux (and it's unix brethren) sucks less. A LOT less. > As much as we may all have a distaste for Windows, why should we strive > to be like it? Why is it wrong for us to retain the ability to make > numerous choices regarding our desktop? Certainly, this means that > there's no unified guide to the user interface, and no code sharing, but > do we really want that kind of restraint placed on us? Linux is all about freedom of choice. There are wonderfully dumbed down versions for PC neophytes. There are serious server-ready platforms as well for those who need to do "heavy lifting" kind of work. That is the driving issue for Linux. It's enormously adaptable. The whole windows-competition issue is a side argument. My mom has been a linux user for 3 years. She likes gnome and StarOffice 5.2 just fine. she rarely if ever needs my help. The one time she ever had a problem with her pc was the 3 months she tried to use Windows. She _hated_ it. To say she is unsofisticated as a computer user would be accurate. windows satisfies some people. Linux satisfies others. So? As long as there are open standards it really shouldn't matter. (that's another fight and a far more important one) The column is a classic troll. It's author is somewhat ignorant -- certainly when it comes to maintaining and adminning servers. > and stand on it's own merits, and quit trying to be like it's big, > fault-ridden brother, Windows. Just like the Mac, Linux has to come > into it's own. It may not be "into it's own" on the desktop (debatable) but it almost certainly is "into it's own" in the server side of the world. Generally I don't waste my time worrying about "if" and "when" Linux might "conquer windows" or "come into it's own". Like millions of other users, I've found it works and works well so I use it. -- Scott Harney<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> "...and one script to rule them all."
