Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX

What's the deal with you Linux fanatics?

(1/5) > >>

slave:
I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Open Source fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Linux box (a P4 3200 w/1024 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Athlon 900 running Windows XP, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Linux box, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.
In addition, during this file transfer, Mozilla will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even vi is straining to keep up as I type this.

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Linux machines, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Linux box that has run faster than its Windows counterpart, despite the Linux machine's faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 3200 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that Linux is a "superior" OS.

Open Source addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use an Open Source over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

(note: for the humor-impaired, this isn't a serious post, just a funny troll)

slave:
Here is another fine linux troll:

I teach OS concepts at a major college.

What I've experienced with Linux is thus.

It's for sure an inferior OS to UNIX and Windows because...

    1)It's really hard to use
    2)Not very stable
    3)Has little real security

It's for sure dangerous to businesses and business computing in general because...

    1)It's source code is basically stolen from others work.
    2)It is free and has no market(money) driving it's development so therefore it's not good for the economy and the public interest in general
    3)The philosophy behind the distribution of Linux is Un-American and more like communism.
This cannot be good for our country.
It allows terrorists just enough encryption and power to aid them in their efforts to KILL us.
    4)The source is provided so ANYONE can create scripts and such to slam a linux system.

It's role should just be for teaching OS concepts.
In that role Linux is great. We use it in our classroom but I certainly explain to my students that it is not a real OS like Sun, SCO or Windows.
If a student writes in a paper in my class and lists Linux as one of the OS's that make up the major market then they get an F on that paper.
The reason is because Linux is not in the major Market it is in the minor market - the second rate
special purpose OS's. Linux is not general enough
to be considered an universal OS.

In it's current state Linux is not ready for primetime. It will never be until Linus Torvalds
does the following.

  1) Settle disputes with the IP holder of UNIX (SCO).
  2) Restricted source license.
  3) Make it a TRUE commercail OS
  4) Single source for distributing.(No SUSE, NO RH)

After a couple of years of that you will see
Linux become a first tier OS instead of a novelty
OS.

All I am saying is let's be realistic about what Linux is and is not.

I am in the middle of an experiment.
With the release of RH8 I decided to make it
my exclusive Desktop OS to do all my work on it
for one year.

I bought RH 8 when it came out and the thing I noticed was I had to do about 6 weeks of almost constant tweeking and refining and reinstalling
I finaly had it about 15% as productive as Windows 98! Think about that!
It is also much much slower that Windows98.
Even though I only load the absolutley minimum processes.

    1)It is not faster than Windows
    2)Does not manage memory better than NT or XP.
    3)The GUI is much less stable and crashes much more than winNT, XP or 98.

These are just facts.

slave:
Open Source? More like Openly Racist


The Open Source movement, otherwise known as 'Free Software', has been a topic of considerable debate on the Internet's most controversial site. The majority of this debate has centered around the technical merits of the software, with the esteemed editors argueing against adopting Linux by employing the full depth of their considerable intellects, and the other side hurling death threats and similar invective. This has allowed many who would not otherwise receive quality information about Open Source software to be made aware of many of its ramifications, but one issue has been left alone: The overt racism that is deeply embedded in the movement.
 
Allow me to explain.
 
Alan Cox; Richard Stallman; Bruce Perens; Wichert Akkerman; Miguel DeIcaza.
 
What do you see in this list of names? Are there any African-Americans on it? Absolutely not, none of those names sound like one a self-respecting black person would have! No Maurice, no Luther, no Lil' Kim. There are many other lists such as this, you can see one here. Flip through each page, do you see anything other than white faces? Of course you don't, because Open Source and its adherents are ardent racists and they absolutely forbid access to the sacred 'kernel' by any person of color.
 
Lets look at another list, this time a compendium of the companies using Linux. Are there any black owned companies on that list? Nooooooo. How about these companies? They all have something to do with Open Source software, any of them owned by an African-American? No again. Here is an extensive collection of photographs from a LUG (Linux User Gathering) meeting, more can be viewed at that link. What is odd about these pictures, and every other photograph I have ever seen of a LUG meeting, is that there is not one single black person to be seen, and probably none for miles.
 
More racist overtones can be found by examining the language of Open Source. They often refer to 'white hat' hackers. These 'white hats' scurry about the Internet doing good, but illegal, acts for their fellow man. In stark contrast we find the 'black hat' hackers. They destroy the good works of others by breaking into systems, stealing data, and generally causing havoc. These two terms reflect the mindset of most Linux developers. White means good, black means bad. Anywhere there is black, there is uncontrollable destruction and lawlessness. Looking further we see black lists that inform other users of 'bad' hardware, Samba, an obvious play on the much hated Little Black Sambo book, Mandrake, which I won't explain except to say that the French are notorious racists. This type is linguistic discrimination is widespread throughout the Open Source culture, lampooned by many of its more popular sites.
 
It is also a fact that all Unix 'distros' contain a plethora of racist commands with not so hidden symbolism.
 
It can hardly be coincidence that the prime operating system of choice of the 'open source supremacists' - Linux, features commands which are poorly disguised racist acronyms. For example: 'awk' (All White Klan) , 'sed' (shoot nEgroes dead), 'ln' (lynch negroes), 'rpm' (raical purity mandatory), 'bash' (bring a slave home), 'ps' (persecute sambo), 'mount' (murder or unseat nubians today), 'fsck' (favored supreme Christian klan). I could go on and on about the latent racist symbolism in Linux, but I fear it would take weeks to enumerate every incidence.
 
Is there a single unix command out there that does not have some hidden racist connotation ? Suffice it to say that the racism pervades Linux like a particularly bad smell. Can you imagine the effect of running such a racist operating system on the impressionable mind ? I don't have to remind you that transmitting subliminal messages is banned in the USA, and yet here we have an operating system that appears to be one enormous submliminal ad for the Klan!
 
One of the few selling points of Open Source software is that it is available in many different languages. Browsing through the list I see that absolutely none are offered in Swahili, nor Ebonics. Obviously this is done to prevent black people from having access to the kernel. If it weren't for the fact that racism is so blatantly evil I would be impressed by the efforts these Open Sourcers have invested in keeping their little hobby lilly white. It even appears that they hate the Japanese, as some of these self proclaimed hackers defaced a web site with anti-Japanese slogans. Hell, these people even go all the way to Africa (South Africa mind you, better known as White Africa) and the pictures prove that they don't even get close to a black person.
 
Of course, presenting overwhelming evidence such as this is a bit unfair without some attempt to determine why these Open Sourcers are so racist. Much of the evidence I have collected indicates that their views are so deeply held that they are seldom questioned by the new recruits. This, coupled with the robot-like groupthink that dominates the culture allows the racist mindset to continue to permeate the ranks. Indeed, the Open Source version of a Klan rally, OSDN (known to the world as Open Source Developer's Network, known to insiders as Open Source Denies Negroes) nearly stands up and shouts its racist views on its demographics page. It doesn't mention the black man one single time. Obviously, anyone involved with Open Source doesn't need to be told that the demographic is entirely white, it is a given.
 
I have a sneaking suspicion as to why their beliefs are so closely held: they are all terrible athletes.
 
Really. Much like the tragedy at Columbine High School, where two geeks went on a rampage to get back at 'jocks', these adult geeks still bear the emotional scars inflicted upon them due to their lack of athletic ability during their teen years. As African-Americans are well known for their athletic skills, they are an obvious target for the Open Source geeks. As we all know, sports builds character, thus it follows that the lack of sports destroys character. These geeks, locked away in their rooms, munching on stale pizza and Fritos, engage in no character building activities. Further, they interact only with computers and never develop the level of social skill that allows normal people to handle relationships with persons of color.
 
Contrasted with the closed source, non-geeky software house Microsoft, Open Source has a long, long way to go.

slave:
can anyone else dig up some good linux/open source trolls?

Stryker:
ha, i thought you were actually trolling i was about to bin it.

so are these things you've come across or did you make them up?

that racist thing kind of pissed me off though.

[ October 09, 2003: Message edited by: Stryker ]

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page