*BSD News Article 40995


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:4865 comp.os.linux.misc:33498 comp.os.os2.advocacy:74523
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!uwm.edu!news.moneng.mei.com!hookup!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news.cs.utah.edu!news.cc.utah.edu!wasatch.com!usenet
From: bobh@wasatch.com (Bob Hauck)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux thoroughly insulted by Infoworld!
Date: 18 Jan 1995 04:05:39 GMT
Organization: Wasatch Communications
Lines: 82
Message-ID: <3fi42j$qbu@lonepeak.wasatch.com>
References: <950116203411@lambada>
NNTP-Posting-Host: olympus.wasatch.com
X-Newsreader: LA Times for OS/2 [version: 3.3e]

In message <950116203411@lambada> - ed.duomo@lambada.oit.unc.edu ("Mr. Ed") 
writes:
>In the columns section of the Jan 16 Infoworld, there is a column
>highly insulting to linux. In it the writer basically says the
>following:

Having just read the article, I think you're overreacting.  The 
overall tone is actually rather positive.  You've gotta read 
Petreley regularly to grok his style.


>  o linux is really not free

The version the Petreley used wasn't.  He bought a commercially-
supported version on CD.


>  o linux users are as neurotic as Amiga fans

Well, Linux fans can be pretty committed <g>.  Sounds like you
might be the one he's talking about (no offense).


>  o linux is difficult to install (their senior systems analyst
>    apparently failed to install it)

But after reading the fine documentation, they realized that 
they didn't need network card support on the install floppy 
because they weren't installing from a network.  After that it
found the CD-ROM and installed without problems.


>  o linux should be called "underware"!

He was making a funny!  It's not quite free/shareware (he bought
a supported version), but it's not quite commercial...it's 
underwear!  Geez, lighten up.  Or read the column more often (it 
is often written in a lighthearted way).

I think you're taking the 'underwear' comment much too seriously.


>He then goes on to refer to linux as underware throughout the column
>-- over ten times. The column is also titled something like "Linux
>should be called underware". Underware what? Hanes? Fruit of the loom?
>BVD? How insulting!
>
>What do you think of this?

He mentions in the column that:

 - TCP/IP networking was "pretty easy" to set up.  Remember that
   he's looking at Linux and other Unices in the context of 
   setting up an Internet gateway.  So this is a big plus.

 - His 3C509 NIC was supported out of the box by Linux but not
   by SCO Unix.  Another big plus.

 - Color-coded directory listings are nice.

 - After another episode of RTFM, X-Windows installed smoothly.

 - The install was smoother than he expected for an 'underwear' 
   product.  The only problems were a matter of documentation,
   not coding.

Overall I felt it was a positive review.  You should have read
the bashing he gave SCO Unix a few weeks back.  He said SCO had
a difficult install, poor docs, poor support for his hardware, 
and didn't live up to SCO's 'plug and play' promise.  

For the record, I run Linux and OS/2 on my personal machine and
Linux on the system from which I'm posting.  All I can say is 
that Linux must be making a splash if Byte and Infoworld are
reviewing it!


===================================================================
 Bob Hauck                                        bobh@wasatch.com
===================================================================