The dubious joys of Linux
I took this page down around February 10th 2003, after a troll posted the URL to a Linux advocacy newsgroup. This was the result. Quite a charming bunch of people, and an amazing collection of insults.
I found out about this thread from my referrer stats. Not one of the people vilifying me had the guts to say any of that trash to my face. And they proved my point perfectly: Linux freaks can't take any criticism of their beloved OS, deriding the person who dares to disagree with them is preferable to actually dealing with the comments, and normal computer users are lower on the evolutionary scale than cockroaches.
Funny thing, I've never been attacked like that by Mac or Windows users.
I've given up on Linux, I never want to see the OS again. It may be a decent system one day, but it is fatally flawed by attracting the kind of religious zealots on that and other newsgroups. While people like that are around, Linux won't attract many normal people, because the zealots scare them off. And who in their right mind would want to be associated with people like the ones in that newsgroup?
(This is the original essay that was posted to the newsgroup)
(see also Matthew Thomas's
Why Free Software usability tends to suck and
Why Free Software usability tends to suck even more)
I read an article on The Register and wanted to respond. The article is called "Making Linux look harder than it is," and the quote that really stood out was this one:
"Could the biggest problem with Linux usability be that most of the people teaching newbies to use Linux are too smart and know too much?"
Robin Miller on NewsForge and The Register
That's a very patronising thing to say. I can't get going with Linux because you're too smart to descend to my level? Perhaps if you made the effort to actually listen, perhaps if someone wrote real documentation, perhaps if someone made the effort to make an OS that could be used by the average user, one that isn't outright unfriendly, perhaps then, normal people wouldn't have such a hard time with Linux.
I took on a job doing Windows tech support knowing I wasn't a Windows expert. Inside a few weeks I'd ploughed through all the help files and manuals I could find, and I could answer just about any question the users threw at me, or be able to find out from somewhere online. I've been trying to get into Linux for months and I have nowhere near that level of proficiency.
I'm no computer idiot. I've been playing with computers since I was nine years old. I can upgrade hardware, sort out printers, and install operating systems. I'm a programmer with several years coding experience. I have an honours degree in Physics from a UK university. True, I was born with an X chromosome instead of a Y like the Linux advocates, but I really can't help that one.
It seems to be standard practice on Slashdot to ridicule anyone who dares to use Windows and say so. Why? I've seen a Linux app crash four times in a row attempting to play an MP3 that plays without incident on Sonique in Windows. I've seen Linux crash and hang for no reason at least as many times as my Windows 98 laptop. I use Windows because it is usable. It gets the job done.
In my experience, Linux is frustrating, and deliberately unhelpful. I tried for a whole morning to get KWord to recall which toolbars I didn't want. I tried the help files (useless), the KDE knowledge base (likewise), the bug reporting system (worse than useless), two Google searches, Linuxnewbie.org, KDE.org, KOffice.org, every config program I had access for, it took multiple hours, and I still have a whole pile of toolbars I'll never use. "Ready for the Desktop," says KOffice.org. Only if that desk is manned by a kernel hacker and sat inside a Microsoft-free zone. Thankfully Jext was written in Java and will run under Linux. That editor I know is at least usable and reliable.
I wanted to be able to use Linux. I want to have an operating system I can just use for all the things I need: email, web browsing, FTP, coding, HTML editing, zipping files, creating and playing MP3s. My requirements and Linux seem to be mutually exclusive. I won't switch to an OS I can't do my stuff on. What's the point of a program you have to reset every time you use it? Programs shouldn't crash because you ask them to open a perfectly normal file.
Linux is an unfriendly operating system, worse than the Unix I used at university. Microsoft have done enough usability testing to know what people expect. Why do the Linux programmers ignore that advice? Because they're not writing the OS for normal people. They don't want us from the herd using their system, or they would have designed it so we could actually use it. And it's pretty obvious the disdain they hold towards us. It shows in the programs. It shows in the chronic lack of useful documentation and the lousy help files. It shows in the obsession with the command line. Most of all, it shows in the patronising attitude of the Linux Elite.