Tucows BSD Section Goes Down in Flames 140
BSD Today ran a comment on Tucows shutting down the Tucows BSD Section after flames from the BSD community about the misinformation they had on the site. Tucows says that they cannot meet the demands of all the "factions" within the BSD camp. It's a cop-out in my opinion; BSD Today and Daemon News seem to do it fine. All any of us asked for was for the inflammatory pro-linux/anti-BSD flavor of it to be toned down, and the misinformation cleared up. DaemonNews also carries some appropriate comments.
Re:Most of the comments were true, IMHO (Score:1)
This is a mistake someone could understand spending a day looking at the various BSD and Linux sites. Interesting Tucows screwed up.
[OpenBSD has minimal support]
OBSD support is not minimal. It has a faq that is readable and holds your hand. It has man pages that simply makes HOWTOs unnecessary. It has mailing lists and newsgroups where people are helpful. If you are a building a firewall with OBSD, there is book on it.
There was also a support, commercial channel announced last year, which I'm not sure is still in play today. But the attempt was there.
I'm not sure where you state that "compared to Linux" the support is limited. It may be small compared to Linux, but it is certainly there and effective.
btw, all this information can be found by reading the 3 FAQs of the open source versions of BSDs and searching /. for 10 minutes. Hardly a lot of effort.
[Support for NetBSD is minimal at best.]
Hardly. See above. Maybe it's *different* than what Linux provides, but it is by no means minimal unless you work on an odd platform.
[No official support for NetBSD]
True, AFAIK and having not even done a web search. Ooo, Tucows got *1* thing right so far. Remember, this is supposed to be a good source of information for the BSDs.
[Hostile OpenBSD install]
For whom though? I've heard SunOS users say time and time again that they like the OBSD install. I walked through the OBSD install with a *Mac* friend for the first time, reading the OBSD faq. Hardly difficult.
The reality is, the reason the word hostile was used was because "it wasn't a easy to do without reading 3 pages of well-written documentation" or lacked a GUI.
[Your reasonings around the difficulty of OBSD system being difficult to configure]
Problem is, the BSDs don't cater to the crowd that doesn't read documentation. The BSDs are trying to provide rock solid stability, support for common hardware, and a largely *classic* unix experience. This last point is an obvious point where the BSDs and Linux differs...Linux really is trying to go after the desktop market and the MS crowd. The BSDs are more concerned with keeping down the bugs in the system.
[Configuring NetBSD is an adventure.]
Just because it's text based doesn't make it hard. Is it because you are used to MS and many Linux products that the mere fact something is different makes it difficult? You sound like a person whose driven an automatic transmission all their life trying to learn to drive a manual. Jeesh.
[Compiling network applications on NetBSD.]
Not sure where you believe you need to *port* ICQ. It's already done. Yeah, you have to compile, but that's also done rather seemlessly for you using the ports collection.
You are aware you can run Linux apps on the BSDs right? Any complaints you have here is also a strike against Linux...and certainly people have no problem using apt or rpms.
[BSD systems being minimal.]
You and Tucows took this blatantly out of context. Yes, it is minimal. But they did not *explain* that it was meant and designed to be minimal and that is the BSD philosophy. Instead, Tucows started with a rather negative leader, "At best..."
If you want to take things out of context, go ahead. But realize that this is your failing to understand the nature of the issue, not the communities.
I won't miss them (Score:1)
Also, http://daily.daemonnews.org, along with http://freshports.org do a much better job.
Re:No Surprise here (Score:1)
If we Linux Zealots are really so bad then why is it that Tucows is giving up on BSD and not Linux?
HELL, the Linux extention of Tucows was first. So if we were really that unbearable, that BSD section would have never seen the light of day.
Re:Something's not bad just because it's not Linux (Score:1)
As far as SCO or Novell goes... who actually runs those dying relics anymore?
Re:Non-sequitor, Tucows is not linux-only! (Score:1)
If what you suppose is true, then that would put BSD usage down below BeOS usage. (Tucows also has a Be section)
Re:Linux Zelot! (Score:1)
Mindcraft was disparaging Linux.
You can't be blind to the VAST difference between these two situations.
Re:Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:1)
Re:Peace Everybody (Score:1)
Commercial Unix is starting to adopt "our" desktop standard(s). That very likely would have been a lot less appealing to the likes of Sun if Troll were in the driver's seat.
What is this Lemming-esque infatuation with having only ONE option. There should be no less than 3 viable ways to do ANYthing. This meagre level of diversity is needed to ensure competition and some variety. Not all of us want to do things exactly the same way that the rest of the herd does.
This is especially true for any AltOS. Otherwise, we would still just be using the "one true interface".
Re:I know what they mean (Score:1)
It seems like the only thing he would have to do to turn off the BSD crowd is to just release it under the GPL...
Re:Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:1)
Hmmm. Now, incorrect (not necessarily dis) information is obviously not a good thing. I suppose it depends on the severity of the incorrect information.
Since I'm not a BSD user and had never visited Tucows' BSD site until this morning, I can not comment on the accuracy of their information. I've been able to read some cached pages at Google, that's it.
Nonetheless, if Tucows says that BSD is released under the GPL as opposed to the BSD licnese... I'd say that's simply incorrect information. It's easy to correct them with a short email containing links to official BSD sites which state otherwise.
From Tucows' point of view, I think they were just trying to put up some of the BSD's and some generic info about BSD. I get the feeling, though, that the BSD communities came down on them a little too hard. That's my opinion, based on what information I've received.
It's easy to demonstrate your dissatisfaction with a company: write them and tell them why you're unhappy and don't use their services or products until they've corrected the problem to your satisfaction. If they aren't a monopoly, the market will adjust against their favour and the company will be forced to correct the situation or quit.
Re:Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:1)
Actually, *I* am not a BSD user and I've never complained to Tucows about anything. My post above is attempting to advocate rational emails with logical points to them, rather than scathing comments and flamebait.
I certainly did not tell anyone to "snort condescendingly", far from it. I believe I encouraged people to simply let the company in question know that you're dissatisfied with their product or service in a rational, logical manner.
However, you do have a point. It never hurts to start something by pointing out the stuff that you really like about their product or service.
I will add, though, that if all else fails, I will let that [dis]information stand.
If I wish, I might publish a page or two of my own, telling people what's wrong with the [dis]information in question, but it's not my job to fix all of the ills in the world. I feel that by taking a stand against a situation like this, by not consuming the product or service (and probably encouraging others not to, too) that you put the pressure on the company in question to fix their own problem(s), instead of trying to fix it for them.
Re:Have you even been following this story? (Score:1)
Yes, I have been following it. The first thing I did was read Tucows' open letter at bsd.tucows.com. The impression I got was that there were *many* people complaining to Tucows. That impression is based off've quotes like this:
"When Tucows periodically gets something "wrong" on the BSD site, we receive a barrage of angry user comments. Paradoxically, when we use this advice to make adjustments we receive an equally prolific battering from other BSD factions indicating that we had it correct to begin with. Any attempt to provide a middle ground only results in hostility from all sides."
To me, it sounds like people jumped down Tucows' throat for publishing incorrect information, instead of just politely pointing it out, thus the link to the Advocacy how-to, which I consider a guideline for the Advocacy for any OS, not just Linux. The Advocacy How-to's information is fairly generic.
Claiming BSD is GPL'd is a pretty blatant mistake to you and me. It should have been to Tucows and their writers/etc, but it wasn't. I don't believe they deserved the flames I'm sure they got, though - and I *know* they got more than the flames from BSD Today or Daemon News.
What I don't know is if people did in fact politely point anything out to Tucows.
If in fact people were pointing out the incorrect information to Tucows and they chose not to fix it... well, that's their deal. They can choose to shut the site down, which is probably best if they don't have any knowledgable people or at least any people who care.
In the end, though, I can only make assumptions about BSD user comments to Tucows based on Tucows' response to the situation. Since Tucows shut their BSD section down, one can assume that the flaming was pretty bad OR that they didn't give a damn. It was probably a bit of both.
Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:3)
Basically, it's easy to sum up this situation: you reap what you sow.
I'm not sure what people expect when they go around being insane zealots, getting in someone's face when they mess up one iota, etc ...But Tucows shows one example: they stop providing a free service.
I urge people to read or re-read the Linux Advocacy howto here [linux.com]. Perhaps if everyone's a little more cordial and constructive with their critisism we can keep companies interested in providing free services to the BSD/Linux/etc communities.
Re:*BSD is dead (Score:1)
I cant see much difference in the stability or elegance of BSD vs. Linux (or FreeBSD vs. Debian) but I can see a big difference in the userbase and the applicationbase (and users attitude).
From my point of view any new system or solution beeing planed on BSD is wasting effort and time. If you just want to learn doing thing "the other way" then BSD is ok.
Re:not unreasonable (Score:2)
Hoo-boy! (Score:1)
Looks like some people forgot to read certain HOWTO's on advocacy.
Flaming zealots. Linux has had this 'feature' for a long time now. And you BSD guys are JUST getting them?
How's it feel to be behind the times?
The above was intended to be a joke.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Re:I know what they mean (Score:1)
Good idea. Throw away potential business!
This Linux/BSD user is glad it's gone! (Score:5)
I'm not kidding.
I've got a few BSD servers, I'm running Linux on my workstation, I love both. TUCOWS did a great job with Linuxberg, but their feeble attempt at a BSD site did WAY more harm than good.
Did any of you complaining about the BSD community actually visit the site before they shut it down? It sucked. It really sucked.
It had potential, if they had had a few people who actually used and believed in BSD products. They didn't. They slapped it together, made gross inaccurate statements about BSD, and never chnged their ways.
Sorry, it had to be said. If it had been a Linux site, the Linux community would have chewed them out at least as badly.
Re:No Surprise here (Score:2)
Stuff this. Look for me on half-empty.
--
Re:heh.. look what happens after I leave ;) (Score:2)
Re: Peace everybody (well, the BSD people first) (Score:1)
*grin* Yeah it is. That was the point.
Re: Peace everybody (well, the BSD people first) (Score:1)
It's better than the BSD lisence. It prevents companies from stealing from the public domain and claiming it as their own. That's real freedom. It's the kind of freedom that creates the stability that people are willing to build around.
Anyway, enough of my arguing. I just enjoy getting you BSD people to show your true faces. Nothing is surer for that purpose than mentioning the GPL.
Re: Peace everybody (well, the BSD people first) (Score:2)
Anytime a BSD bigot puts down the GPL as not being 'free' I'm going to get upset and angry.
Generally, restricting freedom tends to cause economic problems. If the GPL restricts freedom, why aren't there economic problems in the GPL based Open Source community? Seems to me that the flow of informtion and level of activity is much higher in the GPL based parts of the community. Kinda tells me which license is better at promoting freedom.
To me, those kind of assinine comments about licenses are a perfect example of the inferiority complex (not claiming BSD is inferior, for those who are victims of this complex) combined with an elitist attitude that the BSD community is noted for.
The Tucows site had obvious incredibly stupid, misguided and wrong information on it. This much is true. I also have no doubt that some of the behavior that they complain about is also what happened.
I'm perfectly happy to be a friend of the BSD community, but I get the distinct impression that they'd prefer I not be.
Fool (Score:1)
Walnut Creek has been helping the FreeBSD people for *years*.
Tucows was just jumping on the bandwagon because BSD might be the 'next big thing'.
When the BSD people asked them to correct mistakes on their site, they dropped BSD.
Does this sound like the actions of a company that supports the BSD community?
The *BSD community owes Tucows nothing.
--K
Re:Fool (Score:1)
--K
Who needs Tucows... (Score:2)
Let 'em take the easy way out - we have plenty of other, better ways of getting software.
(And none of them have massive amounts of banner ads, either!)
--K
How is it... (Score:1)
They listed the FreeBSD download as an X Windows Performance Monitoring application. Pointing out this error is shooting a bullet in a foot? Riiiiight!
Let's put up a site about motorcycles and when we mention Harley Davidson's, we'll describe them as skateboards with only 3 wheels and a fatal crack straight down the middle due to manufacturing problems. Then when all the Harley riders point out to them that Harley Davidson's are MOTORCYCLES - we can arrogantly and ignorantly rant that they just shot themselves in the foot for speaking up!
Re:Two-faced community is the problem. (Score:1)
Because TuCows lied. An error is an error is an error, and we all make them. But when we realize we have made an error, but do nothing to correct it, that error becomes a lie.
Would you complain if the TuCows Linux aread continually stated that Linux was released under the BSD license, or that it had no applications available, or that it was unsuitable for newbies, kept confusing distributions with each other, yada, yada, yada? Of course you would.
Re:Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:1)
BSD newbies shouldn't be running major BSD sites.
Re: Peace everybody (well, the BSD people first) (Score:1)
Re:No Surprise here (Score:2)
Go read some of the Tucows articles on BSD. If they had done the same thing with Linux, you guys would be calling for the head as well!
It's also safer to dump BSD because a) it's a smaller number of people, b) ports makes Tucows pretty much irrelevant to BSD users.
Re:Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:2)
Read BSD Today's [bsdtoday.com] article to get a glimpse of the kind of FUD that our community can well do without.
Re:No Surprise here (Score:3)
Shooting yourself in the foot is a habit common to all freenix types, not just BSD. If you step out of the Linux camp and view the perspective from a neutral vantage point, you'll see that penguinistas are every bit as petty and irrational as the daemonics.
1)Lets see, you have what, 8 or 9 different version, openBSD, freeBSD, etcBSD... so there is a nice selection available.
And how many Linux distros are there? (there's only 5 or 6 BSDs) Before you say that Linux is just a kernel that hasn't forked, I'm talking about distributions. Or if you will, the "GN" portion of "LiGNuX".
2) You have an old slow file system, so newbies don't get intimidated by anything happening too fast.
A myth. As completely untrue as the myth that Linux uses the BSD TCP/IP stack.
So... why can't you guys stop acting like a red headed buck toothed stepchild and just friggin calm down a bit.
Okay, let's turn the tables around and imagine what the typical penguinista would have done if: TuCows had on a prominent review of Debian GNU/Linux on their *Linux* site with a) a download link to pointing to Redhat, b) the assertion that Debian was released under the BSD license, c) there were no applications available for it, and d) the conclusion that the user should stick with Windows because Debian is too hard.
Re:Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:1)
Sure Slashdot has posted mis-information. But they also had the balls to correct it later, and not go hiding in a corner somewhere.
This is what the *BSD community is upset about... Everyone makes mistakes, but at least Tucows should have corrected their mistake rather than hide.
Re:heh.. look what happens after I leave ;) (Score:2)
Last time I heard mention of 2cows they were in the dog house among Linuxers for publishing some sort of cluelessness. IMO they should go the Corel route and get out of it altogether if they don't care enough to get a clue.
--
This has EVERYTHING do do with Linux (Score:1)
Look, most of the links mentioned in the
There's this holy Linux attitude in most of the
Now, does it really matter? No, not really. I mean who uses Tucows besides Windows people? But the point is that Tucows screwed up and the
Re:Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:2)
Personally, I found their complete lack of research and understanding of the BSD community as a sign of a site that I would never return to...
I disagree with sending inflamatory messages, but also do not condone their [dm]isinformation.
Re:Peace Everybody (Score:1)
From the headline:
The BSD folks are right to ask for that, but I also think there is a little bitterness toward the Linux camp due to its recent (last couple of years) notoriety. Especially since BSD has been around in one form or another longer, and does some things arguably better, yet never achieved the "fame" Linux has.
Re:Peace Everybody (Score:1)
The decisions are not made around what is said on slashdot.org or any other advocatcy(sp) channel.
Agreed, but the current KDE/Gnome war isn't too constructive. And the SysV vs. BSD & Sun vs. everybody else fights in the 80's were quite contentious for a while until the Great Unification. My only point is that a lot of times we end up fighting amonst ourselves when we should be presenting a unified front.
Re:Peace Everybody (Score:1)
I couldn't agree more! In fact, this exactly the point I was trying to make in my original post. There is room in the Unix community to accomodate all sorts of different ways to do something. If you prefer a CLI, use it. If you like a pointy-clicky interface instead, use that. There doesn't have to be just one way to do it. So why bash each other for solving a problem a different way?
Example: last year I set up a gateway on my home net so that all my boxen could share my internet connection. I used Linux because that's what I know. I could have used OpenBSD (or some other variant) and perhaps gotten better performance, security, etc., but does that make my decision wrong? No. Just different. Arguably suboptimal, but not wrong.
Peace Everybody (Score:4)
Linux and BSD each have their strengths and weaknesses. Use them where they are most appropriate. It doesn't have to be an either/or situation.
Re:Their Departure is actually good. (Score:1)
Their Departure is actually good. (Score:3)
did you people read their inflamatory and thoughroughly incorrect articles supposedly "pro-BSD"?
Please people, inform yourselfs before u comment...
See here [bsdtoday.com]
see their crap??
Re:Is this really surprising? (Score:3)
It's my belief they should have called the section "BSD sucks, and here's why."
I read *every* article they posted, and was hard pressed to find *one* good statement about BSD. Not one! The best I could find was along the lines of "Yes, A is good, but it comes with B, and that sucks, so go use Linux instead".
That's not *BSD infighting. It's *TuCows sucking. If I were a BSD user (which I used to be), I sure wouldn't frequent that site. Even their "here's something cool for BSD" ends up with "but it still sucks".
TuCows seemed to be doing a better job at trying to scare away new users than anything else. Supporting existing users, they definitely didn't even approach it with their news & editorials section.
How can you trust a group that insults its audience and its audience's product all the time?
Re:Well what do you expect from a Windows site? (Score:1)
Re:Well what do you expect from a Windows site? (Score:2)
--
Re:Good job... keep the BSD community small (Score:4)
BSDi is a company, not an OS. It's also a new company formed from the merger of BSDI and Walnut Creek CDROM. BSDi's product now, as it was when it was BSDI, is BSD/OS. BSD/OS has never been open.
BSD/OS and the *BSDs do all share a common heritage, specifically 4.4BSDLite2, the last to come out of the CSRG at Berkeley.
It was a few former members of the CSRG who went on to found BSDI and sell BSD/OS. At the same time, Bill Jolitz's 386BSD became stagnant, so two other projects each independantly of each other took it and became NetBSD and FreeBSD. There was no infighting between these two groups, they just each started their own _on_ their own.
The only split due to infighting is OpenBSD's creation, which has been well documented.
TrustedBSD is not a _new_ version, but a name given to a set of extensions that Robert Watson (Remember, that guy with the interview last week?) is working on for INCLUSION into FreeBSD's main tree.
Note that this is not a flame, but an attempt to correct misinformation. If I do not, it will propogate. Others will read your post and think "yeah! What's with TrustedBSD splitting!? Damn those BSD users!". Don't think it can't happen? It does, every day, and sites like Tucows' BSD section made it possible.
The tone of the feedback one gets is directly related to the tone of the content being reviewed. Tucows got back what they put into it.
Which brings us to your "what a surprise comment." It was inflamatory and any negative response you get regarding it is well deserved. And so what if there *are* three (Only the free ones count when talking about segregation and splitting) flavors of BSD? There's several dozen Linux distributions. And yes, I've heard all the reasons why the segregation of Linux was felt to be neccesary.
Wait, no I haven't.
--
I personally think this is great. (Score:2)
But then again maybe I'm hoping for too much. Anyone who needs to be told not to act like a culty religious freak has almost no chance of heeding the message.
Everyone's heard of the Darwin awards. I think we need another award to acknowledge those whose religous convictions have led them to the edge of the cliff, and then beyond it. It shall be called the Waco award in memorial to those brainwashed idiots who pissed the government off so much that it barbequed them.
Lee Reynolds
Re:No Surprise here (Score:1)
Re:Luser, I support a shitload of legacy systems (Score:2)
IPX is a derivative of XNS, so you probably could get a Linux box to speak XNS. If *BSD supports IPX then the same would probably be true.
Toning it down (Score:4)
Toned it all the way down, didn't they?
Re:Peace Everybody (Score:1)
Good job... keep the BSD community small (Score:1)
Sure, daemonnews.org gets it right because they've been around for a while. I didn't get the impression TUCOWS was trying to sabotage the BSD family. Oh well, I really liked seeing my beloved FreeBSD getting some mainstream attention. Silly me.
What a surprise this is coming from a community that already segregated the open version of BSDi into FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, TrustedBSD, etc...
And, yes, I've heard all the reasons why the segregation of BSDs was felt to be neccesary. I'm not knocking one version and praising another. It's just unfortunate we still get to associate contention with BSD.
What to you people expect.. (Score:1)
Re:Luser, I support a shitload of legacy systems (Score:1)
I apologize, I really do. I forgot that not everyone on
I doubt that an SA advocating Linux only is going to get many second looks in the job market.
I know that's what you'd like to think. It validates your current existence, scrubbing old proprietary ISA cards in a basement, doing lonely parsing of odd protocols using old CP/M tools with EULAs that make you an automatic federal felon as soon as you open the box.
Ain't true, though. Linux careers exist, but they require drive, ambition, and perseverance. Those of us who just want to go to DeVry and then spend the rest of our lives licking the ass of some old Novell box need not apply.
I was once like you, well, I didn't create typos as often as you do, but I was like you in the sense that I was willing to settle for second best. Then I met Stallman, and that changed my life. Before I knew it, I was selling Samba servers by the half-dozens, building Perl apps, and making the power of Linux work to help animal welfare organizations. And once I had made the commitment to Free Software, I found that it paid pretty well, too - not millions of dollars, but enough to sleep at night without fear.
Your analogy to a "Porsche-only gas station" is silly. Think, instead, of a high-end auto dealership. My "cars" are GNU/Linux and Open BSD. Sure, I'll dick around with Slowlaris or something similar, but I never lost sight of the goal..
GNU
.
Think about that, Winboy.
Re:Luser, I support a shitload of legacy systems (Score:1)
"Real World", my ass (Score:2)
Yes, your sympathy is touching. But the idea that the "real world" will somehow enforce your ideas of what is "normal" is ridiculous.
Maybe these "Linux zealots" will simply create situations in which Linux (or OpenBSD, or other FREE operating systems) have a chance to demonstrate their excellence. Where I'm currently contracting, I built a Debian box to monitor two Sun Starfires. Why, you ask? Because the Debian box is about five times more stable, and that way we know what's going on.
Linux paid for my motorcycles, my cars, and my house, often at rates twice what NT lusers get paid, and exceeding what Slowlaris admins get.
If you somehow think the "real world" will cut young Free Software gladiators down to size, think again.
Oh yeah, take that Win98 box, and throw it out the window. Your passive acceptance of MS-buttfscking is hurting the rest of us.
Re:Peace Everybody (Score:1)
You need to get some fresh air (away from the internet) and note that most of the real life work around unix is not destructive. Rather people administer and use whatever they like, for whatever task needs to be done, whether it is Irix, solaris, linux, BSD or windows. The decisions are not made around what is said on slashdot.org or any other advocatcy(sp) channel.
Remember: "Slashdot.org is not real life!"
sad (Score:1)
It is one thing to be critical, it is another to ruin a good cause through over criticism.
My suggestion is to switch to decaf, it helps cut down on the knee-jerk reactions that seem to be so typical of the Free Software crowd. It also tastes just as good as regular with none of the zealot side effects.
Good for tucows (Score:3)
Ie, the BSD sites probably get the benifit of the doubt when a BSDer considers 'correcting' misinformation found on those sites than that of tucows. I have no doubt people would have relished grilling tucows on relatively small points than the BSD sites. Incidentally, although I dont read them, they are probably at least more biased and non-objective when it comes to summerizing support and ease-of-use issues related to the various flavours of BSD than tucows would have been.
If anyone really thinks that a collection of individuals at tucows were really out to kill *BSD or to turn the average user away from trying out a *BSD OS (the existance of which, ironically, would have been keeping them employed), I think it's just another case of people being a little to lovey-lovey with their OS of choice. From what I saw of the points under scrutiny, I don't think they were wildly unfair
If something has never been said/seen/heard before, best stop to think about why that is.
Re:Well what do you expect from a Windows site? (Score:2)
I think Tucows know tyheir audience perfectly - enwtwork administrators from the Windows world who heard about Linux and just want to run a stable OS. They find Linux difficult to use and confusing, with some people saying ti easy and other sinsisteing they need to manually recompile their kernel and all their applications too. The `help' section in their GUI only talks about a fairly small range of apps [at most, less than half of the GUI apps isntalled on their system], the GUI isn't consistent, they feel uncomfortable with this typing interface [which, for these users, is much slower than a GUI] and they can't find out how to make a shared directory for users to store common files in without permissions being a problem. Go on, sit your mother down in from of your Linux machineand let her figure out `chmod g+s
These people want to use Linux anyway, because they know and acknowledge Windows doesn't work properly. Most Linux distribution vendors still don't take ease of use seriously. Its nice that familiar faces like tucows and download.com can guide them into getting familiar feeling apps to helpm them administer their system.
Linux isn't more stable than Windows if you can't install it in the first place
Re:Most of the comments were true, IMHO (Score:2)
This I think crystallizes the fact that you simply don't get what I'm trying to say. I shouldn't have to qualify myself: but I find the installs of OpenBSD and most Linux distributions quite comprehensible.
Of your analogy: its pathetic that you think just because I advocate giving people choice to drive their car how they want to I am personally incapable of driving manually.
Re:Most of the comments were true, IMHO (Score:2)
It is hard when your app doesn't compile because a header file is missing. Or something doesn't compile with later [or broken] versions of GCC. It is hard when because someone told you *BSD runs Linux apps, and you realize that this blanket statement is a gross generalization.
It is sometimes perfectly good to assume that soemone knows what they are doing, and reads documentation. Most Linuxes, and many BSDs, do not however aim exclusively at this market - most Linuxes, in fact, don't. There's been so many times I've heard of a network beeing cracked and some BSD advocate says `just install OpenB and have your troubles go away. Firstly, network security isn't that simple. secondly, they probably can't install OpenBSD, because they find it dtoo difficult of because the documentation is porrly written, and their company can't hire external staff to perform this task for them.
Just be honest: `if you have a few years Unix experience under your belt, or have some cash avaliable for training, OpenBSD would be a good solution. With some tinkering and a bit of knowledge, it can also run many Linux applications'.
Re:Well what do you expect from a Windows site? (Score:2)
Yes, I have installed
* Red Hat 6.0, 6.1, 6.2, 7.0
* Storm 2000
* Debian 2.2 [eventually]
* Caldera 2.4 technology preview
* Mandrake 7.0, 7.1, 7.2 [7.2 I run os my main machines]
* esmith 3.0, 4.0 4.1 [which was actually easy]
I have also installed
* OpenBSD 2.8
* Solaris 7.0 and 8.0 i386
And
* Windows 95, 98, 98SE, ME
* Windows NT 4, 2000 Pro, Server
I word for a professional Linux systems administration company. They all suck. Unfortunately most machines already come with a flavour of Windows installed, so end users don't have to deal with Windows crappy installs. esmith is the only one I would consider remotely useable by non-technical people.
Re:Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:3)
Yes, that means its not productive for you to yell at someone who think BSD is GPLed - Tucows were BSD newbies and newbies make poor assumptions. And many other comments [ie, about the installers being difficult] are simply true. They wanted tom provide you with a neat sorted mirror and guide to your apps, and you bit them. Linux users deal with people who don't understand the platform all the time - my employers once thought `hackers' were fourteen year old who broke into computers and defaced websites. When a stranger who doesn't know Linux calls colleagues criminals, I don't get offended. Its an easy mistake to make for someone what gets their news from any mainstream news source. Likewise, when I don't understand why my car doesn't work, and just want my mechanic to fix the damned thing, he's pretty pateint with me.
Thais is because most people are drivers and not mechanics. Deal with it.
Most of the comments were true, IMHO (Score:4)
"OpenBSD support is limited"
Compared to Linux, it is. In turn, Linux support is also limited in size when compared to Windows. That doesn't mean your platform is bad. It just means that there's less support. Its true, deal with it.
"Support for NetBSD is minimal at best."
Compared to FreeBSD [biog in ISPs] and OpenBSD [big it security circles], support for NetBSD is tiny.
"There is no official commercial support for NetBSD at this time. "
Well, that may be true. I don't know. Keep in mind the word official
"The OpenBSD installation process is "not very friendly, in fact its downright hostile.""
Um, this is true. Don't get cut up over it, acknowledge it, fix it, and prove your maturity. This isn't pro Linux anti-BSD ism. Debian's and Red hat's installers suck too.
OpenBSD is "a very difficult system to configure and use since no configuration front-end exists like FreeBSD's
Well, was it obvious to the user? This is a mistake, but it might have been an honest one. No tool exists unless it is obvious to most users it is there. coming from the Linux world, one sees this repeatedly with Linux distributions that hide their confioguration tools from their menus. The newbioe isn't being dumb, they're beiong logical -if they ain't showing it to me, it probably doesn't exist. A fair enough assumption to make. People rarely read documentation.
Configuring NetBSD is "an adventure every time."
The NetBSD installer is not for timid -- "it is an old style text based installer."
Oh, cmon - how are you gonna argue this isn't the case?
"NetBSD applications support is minimal as well."
Um, yes. Comapred to Free and Open, yes. Sorry, its a fact of Life. I'm a Linux user. Linux application support is also pretty minimal comapred to Windows or MacOS.
"NetBSD support for network applications, such as ICQ and messenger clients, is seriously lacking."
It is. Not everyone wants to port and compile source. Not everyone knows C. Most people don't. Slashdot is the only place where end-users don't exist, and you can tell somebody to `code it themself'.
"NetBSD is a very minimal operating system."
It is. It lacks most of the polish that most users expect [even system administrators - remember, more people use NT than Unix precisely for that reason]. Stop bitching that this isn't the case. Either shut up and tell them you like minimalism, or try and make it even less minimal than it is today, just to proove them wrong.
Re:Luser, I support a shitload of legacy systems (Score:1)
Never know. There's a Porsche-only parts place up the road, and they've been doing business for twenty odd years. Same goes for the GM-only junkyard across the street, the Triumph-only junkyard down in Ohio, the fellow in Nevada that rebuilds Opel transmissions exclusivly, etc.
Or perhaps a better case, the fellow out by my buddies place that only sells three varieties of gasoline; 96 octane leaded, 102 octane leaded, and 110 octane leaded. Cars that'll take that stuff are fewer and farther apart then Porsche! I saw four Porsche this morning, and (save mine), I saw NO cars capable of being run non-destructivly on 110 leaded.
Re:Something's not bad just because it's not Linux (Score:2)
Visit the article; Look at the list of 'opinionated misinformation/slamming' Tucows is accused of. Of the seven examples, only one would actually raise an eyebrow as untrue. The BSD externals ARE virtually the same as they were three years ago, the FreeBSD IRC channels ARE a bit elitist, OpenBSD IS hard to install, even for those familiar with other variants of *nix, etc..
The BSD zealots didn't like being judged by people from the Linux and Windows camps. That's all there is to it.
(Please note; I have run everything from Xenix to Tru/64 to Solaris, through half a dozen BSD variants and Linux.)
Re:This has EVERYTHING do do with Linux (Score:1)
carpetbaggers who are trying to make a buck of
the sweat of the people doing the
real work bringing us great free OSs like the
BSDs and linux.
Linux vs. BSD: Reminds me of Jimmy "J.J." Walker (Score:5)
"You've got Protestants killing Catholics, Catholics killing Protestants. I guess it goes to show you -- without Blacks or Jews, people will improvise!"
Re:Luser, I support a shitload of legacy systems (Score:1)
Your "real world" and my "real world" must be on two different planets.
Re:Most of the comments were true, IMHO (Score:2)
Um, yes. Comapred to Free and Open, yes. Sorry, its a fact of Life. I'm a Linux user. Linux application support is also pretty minimal comapred to Windows or MacOS.
Not true. NetBSD support is behind FreeBSD. OpenBSD support is by far a distant third. Take a look at package growth charts. It is a couple simple line graphs illustrating the growth of the ports trees over the years. FreeBSD leads the rest with around 4,500.
Re:Most of the comments were true, IMHO (Score:3)
Well, that may be true. I don't know. Keep in mind the word official
Yes there is OFFICIAL for NetBSD. It's a company called Wasabi Systems [wasabisystems.com]. It was formed a few months back by many of the core NetBSD group.
"NetBSD support for network applications, such as ICQ and messenger clients, is seriously lacking."
It is. Not everyone wants to port and compile source. Not everyone knows C. Most people don't. Slashdot is the only place where end-users don't exist, and you can tell somebody to `code it themself'.
I disagree. Most of all your GNU/Linux clients are already found in the ports tree. You should check it out.
Just another example of OS advocates STITF... (Score:2)
-Moondog
Re:Most of the comments were true, IMHO (Score:1)
Re:Most of the comments were true, IMHO (Score:1)
I would have to take the 'header' comment as a sign of poor portability on the part of the programmer, making the assumption the the end user is running linux. FreeBSD, at least (perhaps others) runs linux binaries with the addition of a kernel module and the addition of libraries. I will grant that this is not as straight forward as it could be, but the only way to make it simpler would be to install it by default, which most people probably don't need. If you are compiling your own binaries, you already know something, and would probably spend less effort using the ports instead ('make && make install').
The only assumption I will make is that if someone doesn't understand what they are trying to do (presumably what they want to do), they should read documentation. I consult documentation on all sorts of things that I don't do on a regular basis (car maintenance, electronics setup). Anybody who doesn't make that minimal effort wouldn't have been helped much by a cute teddy bear leading them through a touchy feely menu. Oh, and network security for most people is that simple. install OpenBSD. If they don't know more than just installing it, they are in a much better position than if the same person installed any other system (assume same intelligence level, so no comparisons to say "trusted solaris"). Personally, the openbsd setup is the easiest I have ever used. The worst part is the disk layout, which the CD shows a full example of it in operation. I will grant that a clueless newbie would not know about man pages without being prompted by it. If you can get to that point, documentation is not a problem.
Lastly, the same could be said of anything: more experience helps.
Re:Most of the comments were true, IMHO (Score:1)
I could have done without the first sentence. Sorry..
Re:*BSD is dying (Score:1)
The majority of linux and BSD users don't post. And a large number don't read
Re:*BSD is dying (Score:1)
As opposed to using 'he' as the non-gender specific pronoun. Perhaps s/he?
Would you perfer it? Or perhaps IT?
Re:*BSD is dying (Score:1)
Hell, I could even be transgendered, on my way from being a he to a she, or a she to a he.
I could even be a eunich who uses unix.
(Besides, the wife whould ge upset if the GF dumped me. Now she has to get a new playtoy....for all you know)
Have you even been following this story? (Score:2)
Cause you don't sound like you have a clue what you're talking about. The advocacy how-to is a great resource, but not relevant here. There was no "insane zealotry" involved, at least not from bsdtoday or daemonnews - one might argue that the tucows/bsd staff was involved in some "insane zealotry" in favor of windows and linux I suppose.
Tucows hired writers who hadn't the slightest clue about anything BSD to write that section, and those writers couldn't even be bothered to do the slightest research before they blathered off their inane and misinformed views, or even to correct their factual errors when readers tried to politely correct them. After awhile a couple of real BSD writers corrected them publically, and tucows responded by closing the section down, leaving the nonsense letter that's up currently, which has no more connection to reality than their consistent statements previously claiming that BSD was GPLd.
Re:"Real World", my ass (Score:2)
A lot of linux types have a Windows desktop machine at work, not because they're forced to, but because they're too weak-willed to bring the issue to a head. Very few employers will give up a talented sysadmin over the issue of what OS he runs on his desktop.
With regard to legacy crap, I suppose it can be fun 'detective work' in a way. I'm probably lucky - the company where I'm now contracting has a firm policy of ejecting legacy crap, even before a replacement is found. A while back they chucked all mainframes and VMS in favor of Unix. Occasionally a manager does not want to upgrade equipment in his department that 'works perfectly'. Eventually, we will tell him that during the next outage he will receive no support, and his refusal to upgrade will be shown as the cause of the outage. This seems to dislodge even the most stubborn legacy crap.
Is It Getting Hot In Here? (Score:2)
But seriously, why sit around and debate which operating systems are better? The industry will decide who lives and who dies. Personally, I run OpenBSD, but that didn't stop me from trying out Linux. Now, I'm looking at Freesco [freesco.org] for that old 486 box in the corner.
--
Is this really surprising? (Score:5)
At least, you'd expect nobody to fault you for your creative efforts.
But what if, while you were going about your stuff, you had a large crowd of people standing around you, shouting insults, throwing beer cans at you, and pointedly making the case that despite the fact that you are TRYING to get something done, you can't possibly do the job as well as THEY, even though THEY aren't doing it?
Wouldn't that just piss you off? Would you want to keep going?
So we have a bunch of snooty, nose-in-the-air types who just can't seem to accept being belittled to the level of (gasp!) TUCOWS, who also work with (HEH!) WINDOWS SOFTWARE!, who've spoiled an ally in their cause, and halted a nice effort.
I wonder how many of these intensely critical remarks came from people who just figured out how to boot BSD?
Way to go, guys! Hope you're proud!
Let this be a lesson: You'll catch a HELL of alot more bees with honey than with vinegar...
-Ben
Re:Well what do you expect from a Windows site? (Score:2)
As to your bizarre rant about them probably thinking "BSD and Linux users were just like their brain-dead Windows users", well thats about as smart as jamming your head in the car door. It's comments like this which give the whole free software movement a bad name.
If Tucows is a windows site it is their right, just as slashdot chooses to be a non-windows site, and just as linux.org chooses to be a non-windows site, and just like sun.com chooses to be a Sun site!
Re:OS Wars (Score:2)
Right on man
Re:Something's not bad just because it's not Linux (Score:2)
Re:Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:2)
Wow, you have more self control than I do. If someone accused me of being a criminal for something so innocous, I would be deeply offended. I don't mind harmless ignorance, but when people start to harm your reputation, that's where I draw the line.
In a valiant attempt to stay on topic, I believe that the BSD community was wrong to flame Tucows for inaccuracies in their articles. They were BSD newbies, and I can't see how saying things like "BSD is under the GPL" is wholly harmful to the BSD community. If they make a mistake, do what you should do with any newbie: point out their mistake, IN A KIND MANNER, and show them how to correct it. ITS THAT SIMPLE.
Sheesh
what a surprise... (Score:5)
When Tucows periodically gets something "wrong" on the BSD site, we receive a barrage of angry user comments. Paradoxically, when we use this advice to make adjustments we receive an equally prolific battering from other BSD factions indicating that we had it correct to begin with. Any attempt to provide a middle ground only results in hostility from all sides.
Boy, this doesn't sound like the Slashdot crowd *I* know...
What does this have to do with Linux? (Score:2)
Tucows attempts to provide a BSD portal.
BSD users send flames to Tucows regarding misinformation.
Tucows decided that it couldn't make the BSD crowds all happy, so it ditched it's BSD efforts.
This has nothing to do with Linux, but everything to people who do not know how to provide constructive criticism.
Sending flaming emails to a person or company is not going to get you anywhere, and this incident is just proof of that.
Re:Peace Everybody (Score:2)
Why would that happen? I thought the article was about Tucows dropping their BSD section. BSD != Linux.
Everyone's so quick to jump on the BSD crowd.. (Score:2)
Never mind that Tucows have hardly substantiated their claims of "terrible flames." For all we know they could have got 1000 legitimate complaints, 80 trolls and not enough hits to justify keeping the site up.
Sure, they were providing a free service. A free service that shunted out a lot of negative criticism, and a lot of information that was just plain incorrect, to the general public. If you run a site on BSD, shouldn't you get at least one guy that's used BSD for longer than two weeks on board to write, or at least check most of the material?
I'm not sure what they're getting at with all their noise about "one BSD faction hollering when we fixed things according to another faction's instructions." I can't see BSD factions fighting over the OpenBSD link pointing to another BSD variant, and vica versa. Or a particular BSD variant being described as bare and featureless, no doubt without the reviewer even looking at the ports section. And he found the online crowds unhelpful.. gee, maybe he was asking stupid questions and should have RTFM? If you want support for BSD, you go buy BSDi, just like if you want support for Linux you go buy one of the boxed Redhats that costs 40 times as much as a burnt ISO image.
In any event, for the BSD community to show this 'lack of appreciation' for a free 'service' demonstrates only one thing.. that the community doesn't feel the need to prostitute itself for publicity. bsd.tucows.com didn't provide decent information and the entire concept of tucows for a platform with a well integrated ports collection (or Debian's apt ... choose your poison) is pointless - it provides no benefit to the community whatsoever. (If you really wanted to find an application outside of the ports/apt/etc collection, go search freshmeat.) Why on earth should the BSD community feel obligated to give them the time of day?
.plan (Score:4)
2 - WinRight bombards tucows with insults and "suggestions" for improving their Windows Section.
3 - WinLeft Creats a petition site claiming "Tucows is going downhill" and "What's with all the changes!"
4 - WinRight emails tucows declaring that WinLeft are a bunch of wacked out OSS advocates, and should be ignored
5 - WinLeft rubutts with "WinRight are all Linux Zealots, just trying to screw the system" Followed by a massive flame mail/DDOS attacks.
6 - WinRight Starts massive mail-bomb campaign against tucows.
7 - WinLeft Counters with a "Manifesto" delivered to Tucows re: "The Diminishing Quality, and overall suckieness of the Tucows Windows Section" Boycott Proposed, more flames.
8 - Tucows decides it is all too much for their poor support staff.
Voilla, no more windows section on Tucows, more room for Atari ROMs and Mac Software.
Re:Advocacy and attitudes... (Score:2)
not unreasonable (Score:2)
freeky (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Substition for BSD (Score:2)
heh.. look what happens after I leave ;) (Score:2)
--
Rob Kennedy
What a cop out... (Score:2)