See also: last week's Back page page.

Linux links of the week

One that just popped up is portico.org, a clearing house of brief tips (mostly one-liners) which is, unfortunately, afflicted with the "small font disease."

Tip of the week has fewer entries, but explores them in depth. Some of what's there is quite useful.

LinuxHardware.net intends to be a clearinghouse for hardware-related information.

Letters to the editor

From: "Matt Wilkie" <matt.wilkie@gov.yk.ca>
To: <editor@lwn.net>
Subject: open file formats
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 13:04:13 -0800

Hi, on Jan 7 Zack Brown said:

  <<snip>>
  Now I'm not saying everyone should run out and learn TeX. That
  system has its own problems and limitations. But people should keep
  in mind that up until now Linux has remained a fully integrated
  system, with everything talking to everything else. Why should
  office and productivity suites be above all that? Why should the
  linux community allow linux to become just a cheaper and more stable
  version of Windows 98?

  In the coming months, let's learn to put open file formats and
  scripted automation on a par with open source. The gimp is a good
  example of something that does these things already. Let's let the
  commercial venders know that if they want to run on linux, they have
  to let linux run on them.
  <<snip>>

and I would like to emphasize Zack's message. In my work as a
Geographic Information System technicican closed & incompatible
file formats have been my single biggest bane. I have wasted more
hours on, and my clients have recieved much bigger invoices because
of, and I have spent more money on more software packages, screwing
around transferring data.... I just don't want to think about it. But
I have to. Everyday. Sadly, it's not a matter of choosing the best
tool for the job, but choosing the jobs for the tool, and throwing out
(or losing) what doesn't fit.

My experience and background is in the Wintel World. Over the last few
months, while hanging out at LWN, /., Gnome.org, and the like, hope
has been rising and flowering within me. A light at the end of the
tunnel. Maybe I _won't_ be condemned to curse the tools I make my
living with on a daily basis.

Anyway, please, please take heed. 'Free' and 'open' need to be
expressed across the board: source code, documentation, file formats,
protocols, procedures, everything... It's very important.

Well, that's it then.

-mw

Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 12:00:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Peter Rasmussen <plr@isgtec.com>
To: Barry.Randall@minnesotamutual.com
Subject: Re: FUD

Hi Barry Randall,

You wrote:
>From: Barry.Randall@minnesotamutual.com
>To: "editor(a)lwn.net" <editor@lwn.net>
>Subject: FUD
>Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 09:58:27 -0600
> 
>Dear Linux Daily News
> 
>I'm a dedicated reader, and I appreciate your work in assembling all
>the Linux info. It sure makes my life easier.
> 
>One suggestion: please stop referring to any criticism of Linux as
>"FUD." You seem to do this reflexively, which makes you look bad. 
>
> [...]
> 
>Sincerely,
> 
>Barry Randall
>Equity Technology Analyst
>Advantus Capital Management
>St. Paul
>barry.randall@minnesotamutual.com

I have seen this before, especially on slashdot.org, and I would like
to say that I disagree with you. Keeping this short, I will dare you
to tell me where you saw criticism of Linux being fended off as FUD
when it wasn't. And please be careful to explain why that/those
article[s] weren't in fact at least partly FUD, because otherwise I
will get back to you.

Following various mailing lists, eg. on vger.rutgers.edu, you will see
plenty criticism, so the Linux community doesn't think Linux is
perfect. However, when un/mis-informed journalists wants to add some
bad/weak points to Linux in their stories it often comes down to
FUD. And because those articles are often read by not-yet-users of
Linux it is very important that they are rebutted in a timely and
ordely manner.

Finally, please withdraw your claim that LWN is "unable to tolerate
any viewpoint but your own", as for example these (and your's) letters
to the editor are published (hence my email to you) and show that
other opinions are in fact tolerated. Therefore your claim is
offensive to me.

I am in no way related to LWN, except as a reader of their articles.

Thank you,

Peter