rick at linuxmafia.com
Thu Dec 7 15:49:22 PST 2006
I feel like a sucker for having asked your objections to an essay I
didn't even write, but, hey, that's my error, and I'll pay the price.
Quoting Daniel Gimpelevich (daniel at gimpelevich.san-francisco.ca.us):
> A point-by-point would be much longer than the page itself. L
A truly glorious, epic hand-wave. Nicely played, sir.
> The purpose of the essay is the very first thing that has not changed with
> the times. When it was written, Linux was "a better solution, which just
> so happens to also be viable." Thus, advising those who wish to promote
> and market Linux-based solutions to cast aside thoughts and actions that
> might shine any kind of favorable light on a non-Linux solution
> (presumably including *BSD and the like) was very prudent.
Your premise about the "advising" is transparently bogus, and supported
not at all by the text.
> 2) What you described before regarding parasitically encumbering preloads
> and the glut of consultants is far more true today than it was then.
> These two developments very much work against the tone of the essay.
You _might_ be correct, or not -- but it's completely impossible for me to
determine from the above (or from the above plus the remainder of that
paragraph) what on earth you mean.
> I'd like to see such a work...
Well, you know whom to contact.
> As I touched on above, it seems the opposite is happening: There's so much
> candor and simple frankness that it gives the false appearance of being
> calculatingly deceptive. Ironic, isn't it?
And I thought *I* was a little paranoid.
More information about the conspire