Rory - Neopoleon : Linux Magazine Editor Responds

Welcome to Neopoleon - Sign in | Join | Help

Navigation: Home | Forums | Galleries

Linux Magazine Editor Responds

I just got home about an hour ago from being in Colorado for a week, and what do I find in my inbox?

Martin Streicher, editor of Linux Magazine, and the guy who wrote a Letter From the Editor with which I recently had some beef, wrote to me.

While I’m too bleary-eyed and desirous of face-planting my bed to comment much on this right now, I still wanted to get his response up so that you could read it.

I must say – The Martin who responded to the post seems rather different from the Martin who wrote the nasty letter about Microsoft.

I’d also like to add that this month’s edition of the magazine has a much more pleasant letter from Martin, this time focusing on the ways in which he digs open source, rather than the ways in which he despises Daddy (for those of you who don’t know, “Daddy” is my nickname for Microsoft).

Thanks for writing back, Martin, and I will definitely be taking you up on your offer to print an abridged version of my letter. I really appreciate the opportunity to at least try to help represent myself and my ‘softie homies as humans rather than corporate, bloodthirsty techno-vampires :)

Anyhoo, here’s the letter. Martin also left a copy as a comment in the original post.

Hey, Rory. I have been swamped with deadlines and the like, so please excuse my delay.

I appreciate your response. Many of my friends earn their living coding for Windows, and I earned my living working on Windows and Mac from 1993-2001 as the producer or technical director for After Dark and YOU DONT KNOW JACK and other software. I am sure that software people are the same everywhere, coding to their heart's content.

I do think that many of the issues that plague Windows end-users are inexcusable. If Microsoft Windows was a car, I think it would face mandatory recalls. I am sure MS people try hard to fix things, but the rhetoric of "Mea Culpa" is getting a little old. It's not the message of individuals, but of Microsoft leaders that I find hard to tolerate. Blogs and forums may share the views of employees, but the world at large sees the message of Bill, Steve, Jim, and Co.

And speaking personally, having to maintain my family's computers, I can tell you that I am not a happy Microsoft customer. I've settled back to Windows 2000 due to severe problems with XP on a desktop and laptop. Viruses, spyware, pop-ups, etc. My Macs? Flawless.

I'd be happy to run your letter, if you can condense it for print. You can point to the whole online letter, but I could not run anything as long as your post. (I just have one page for letters.)

Martin

Published Friday, April 29, 2005 8:17 AM by Rory

Filed Under: Enter the Nerd

Comments

	Brian Kuhn said: I appreciate that Martin has a few good things to say about Microsoft/Windows, he also is still taking shots at both. But his criticism seems to be targeted at what I consider the 'top-dog syndrome'. If you are the dominant operating system you WILL have the most viruses, spy-ware, and pop-ups. Writers of malignant software are stupid, but they are not that stupid. If I am trying to bring down the maximum number of computers or steal the most amount of user data, I would not be targeting Macs or Linux boxes, I would target Windows. Why? Because you don't go after the minority, you go after the majority. Some days I wish Macs and/or Linux would become more dominant so that they could discover that it is not the magical power of their infinitely better operating system that is keeping them relatively free of virus and spy-ware problems, it is Microsoft acting as a 'human shield' that is protecting them. Certainly Microsoft can improve the security and reliability of their operating systems (which I see them actively trying to do). But stop claiming that your alternate OS is "Flawless", that is just hubris waiting to bite you in the ass. I still don't understand what 'message' Bill/Steve/Jim are putting across that is so evil. Even if you only have one page to write an editorial, it would be nice to have some context for a complaint. So tell me, what is the Microsoft leadership saying that is so objectionable? April 29, 2005 2:24 PM
	Rick said: "If Microsoft Windows was a car, I think it would face mandatory recalls." Cars are mechanical, and based on the laws of physics. Also, you will find that cars break down very quickly when people "Hack" or "Exploit" a poor design (like why the hell did they put the brake lines on the outside of the car. They are just asking to be cut). Recalls are generally performed because some part will break, causing a physical safety concern. Its the last part that makes it so much different than software. Windows XP has been more stable than any version of X (KDE, Gnome, etc) that I've ever run. Granted i'm certainly no Linux guru, but I know plenty of people that are not Windows gurus, and still their computer just keeps working. When Linux becomes even remotely intuitive to use, has a decent GUI, etc. then it will potentially have a shot at the WindowsXP market. I think the Mac would have a real shot if their marketing was targeted better. They really only market to their own customers it seems. I never hear someone ask me, "Hey Rick, what do you think of the new Dual Processor G5? Its only $12,000, is that a good deal?" They have never even heard of it..... April 29, 2005 2:28 PM
	Steve Majewski said: I find it rather fascinating that someone would write such a hate filled article (in a magazine, no less) then blatantly tout how much he hates maintaining his Windows PCs at home. Isn’t the open-source community supposed to be better? Wouldn’t rebuilding the system with Fedora and Open Office give you a more stable (and cheap) system and contain the basic necessities of all computers? I guess not. You see, Martin feels it necessary to keep multiple PCs with Windows (maybe they won’t work with Linux…that tells you something right there). In my opinion, this goes beyond curiosity over the competition. Continuing on, since when did writing software for Windows or Mac make someone an expert on those systems? He wasn’t writing kernel level stuff here, were talking video games. Frankly, it doesn’t surprise me he had more problems developing against Windows than Mac. Why? Simple, Windows supports more hardware and installations. Therefore you’re going to see more conflicts between drivers, software, etc. Think of it in terms of a mechanical engineer. It’s much easier to develop some new device for a Cessna than for an F-117. In an earlier post on my BLOG, I addressed some of the animosity between the open-source and retail communities. In the end, it goes back to convictions and whether or not someone has the courage to stand behind them. To rant and rave about how crappy Windows is and yet carry around a few installations of your own is rather stupid. It would be like if I were to complain that I hate Ford cars, and then go out and buy a Ford. I doubt anyone would give me any sympathy. Therefore, it’s hard for me to give sympathy to many of the open-source whiners out there. Still, there are a few that adhere to their beliefs, and, if nothing else, they have my respect. April 29, 2005 3:50 PM
	Greg said: MS does not write viruses, spyware, or pop-ups. They are not responsible for all malicious software in the world. The best they can do is patch any security holes as they are found. The kinds of problems mentioned are almost always a result of an end user willingly running a malicious application. I never have problems with any of my machines at home because I don't visit questionable websites (ok, well not A LOT of questionable websites...), and I know better than to run exe's from a website or email attachment. April 29, 2005 5:09 PM
	Mike Dimmick said: My copy of "Windows Internals, 4th Edition" has some statistics of what Microsoft found in about 2.5 years of analysing Online Crash Analysis dumps - cases where the system has blue-screened and the user has, after the system has rebooted, elected to submit the crash data to Microsoft. 70% of all blue-screens were caused by third-party device drivers. A further 15% had an unknown cause - the crash dump was too corrupt for analysis. 10% was due to hardware errors. Only 5% could be blamed on coding errors in Microsoft's code. It would be easy to simply point the finger at the third-party driver developers and leave it at that. What's happened instead is that MS have tried to look at why driver developers make these mistakes. They've come up with the Windows Driver Foundation, currently in beta, to do more of the boilerplate work and simplify the work the driver author has to do. Hopefully this will lead to a more reliable Longhorn - not that XP is particularly unreliable, if you have a good set of hardware from reputable manufacturers and run it within specification. April 29, 2005 7:19 PM
	Andy said: I would say I'm a nuetral party because I'll use whatever works better for my users. Currently that's Windows for my Desktop users. What Mike said about drivers is true but it also has to do with how and where drivers ran on the Windows systems that were famous for crashing. When Windows switched to loadable kernel space drivers like many Unix systems use a lot of those problems went away to where seeing a blue screen in WIN2K or XP is way more rare than locking up a Linux box. Run any kind of X GUI system on Linux and you have to know the golden rule "always keep a terminal running" because it will eventually lock up on you and you will need to use the terminal to get things unstuck. To me this is just as bad as blue screens ever were to a user. I like running Unix on servers because it beats the pants off Windows servers but so far I have seen nothing desktop wise from the OS community that is within five to ten years of where MSFT Windows is now. I wouldn't wish a Linux desktop on my least favorite user. Macs are getting cooler by the day but their hardware is still way overpriced. April 30, 2005 1:50 AM
	Christopher Pietschmann, MCSD, MCAD said: "And speaking personally, having to maintain my family's computers, I can tell you that I am not a happy Microsoft customer. I've settled back to Windows 2000 due to severe problems with XP on a desktop and laptop. Viruses, spyware, pop-ups, etc. My Macs? Flawless." Just becuase the Mac and Linux OS's aren't targeted as much by virus writers, spyware writer, etc. doesn't mean it's Microsofts fault. It also doesn't mean that Mac or Linux are more secure or less vulnerable to these things. The most popularly used OS is the one that gets attacked as much. "Oh, no I have a virus on my WinXP box, but my Mac isn't vulnerable to it" Well, duh! They don't run the same code. This just really appears to be a cheap shot at Microsoft. "If Microsoft Windows was a car, I think it would face mandatory recalls." Ok, first off, if someone throws nails on the road and you blow out a couple tires, is it the car manufacturers fault? The same thing goes with software. Everything has its faults, and those faults can be exploited. April 30, 2005 3:57 PM

Linux Magazine Editor Responds

Comments

Brian Kuhn said:

Rick said:

Steve Majewski said:

Greg said:

Mike Dimmick said:

Andy said:

Christopher Pietschmann, MCSD, MCAD said:

About Rory

This Blog

Post Calendar

Post Categories

Feeds