Slackware Rant

Yes, this is a rant. pure, unaltered hate and bile to follow:


<rant>


Check out the first sentence on the Slackware "General Info" page:

The Official Release of Slackware Linux by Patrick Volkerding is an advanced Linux operating system, designed with the twin goals of ease of use and stability as top priorities. Including the latest popular software while retaining a sense of tradition, providing simplicity and ease of use alongside flexibility and power, Slackware brings the best of all worlds to the table.


Does anyone using slackware actually believe this? How is a distribution that has no graphical installer, no network-enabled package managment and a severely restrictive list of packages available on the default install easy to use? How is slackware more advanced than a distribution that provides proper package managment services?

I guess when they say "while retaining a sense of tradition" they mean "feels like you just stepped into a time-warp into the Linux distros fo yester-year".

I guess it's fine for those of you who want the massochistic rituals of using Linux in the early 1990's (I was there: been there, done that, bought the T-shirt). The the sane members of the human race who want a proper Linux distribution I strongly recommend something else.


</rant>


I think I need more practise at ranting - that was pretty tame really, but I feel better, whcih is the most important thing.

Cheers,

6 comments:

DaveB said...

for developing your Rant-Foo you might like to train by reading this

Thomi Richards said...

yes - although I really hope my blog posts never drop to that level.

However, as someone who regularly contributes to open code, I think I have a certain license to criticize.

DaveB said...

Ha!

If only coders are given license to criticize then the users really are left out in the cold.

mmmmm that explains a lot actually.

Thomi Richards said...

Hang on Dave, you're trying to argue the same point both ways - On the one hand you post a link to an article that points out (I'm paraphrasing heavily here) that "if you want something changed - do it yourself, here's the source", and then on the other hand you suggest that users miss their right to complain!

Which is it? Are users allowed to whine (as I have in my post) without having to contribute anything to the project (after all, their input is probably still valid, right?), or are only contributors allowed to complain, since they actually did the work and know how the product works?

Personally I think user complaints are the most valuable feedback you can get. These people use your software day by day, and probably know your software better than you do.

DaveB said...

>Hang on Dave, you're trying to argue the
>same point both ways

Yeah - of course. Why have a cake unless you can eat and keep it at the same time?

But anyway - I was just throwing the linux-hater at you as a fine example of a Rant. Not particularly for that article.

He really does let loose with some fine rants ... and yet is surprisingly familiar with Linux for one who hates it.

Thomi Richards said...

Ahh, I understand.

Of course, you have to know your subject in order to really hate it, right?

Post a Comment