http://www.softpanorama.org/OSS/bad_linux_advocacy_faq.shtml
----
''moved here from LinuxPerceptionProblems''

'''Bad FooOS Advocacy'''

The things that annoy me the most about FooOS, for some value of FooOS::

	* Zealotry. This is also why I never liked Macs or Amigas. I don't care. ''No one cares.'' It gives me a headache.
	* Zealotry, like the "FooOS community." This is the same thing Mac and Amiga users said. It's ''software''. People who use FooOS are not automatically part of the Linux community. A lot of people are put off by the cultism.
	* Zealotry, like cognitive dissonnance. On Linux, KDE vs. Gnome is not the only inconsistency with the GUI. All the Motif applications come to mind, not to mention the accelerator key nightmare. And the Windows 2000 networking subsystem rewrite wasn't as smooth as it could have been.
	* Zealotry, that makes every decision one of great life import. IE vs. Netscape, vi vs. emacs, KDE vs. Gnome, etc. That just takes too much psychic energy to deal with.
	* Zealotry, that causes flamage to pave the way of new business ventures.  
	* Zealotry, that special form of arrogance that convinces smug IT departments to wipe our your Windows disk and install Linux on it without making backups of your data. (True story; happened to a Red Hat employee.) The same arrogance that makes IT departments plug their ears when you mention you are using PINE, on Linux, to access their totally SNAFU'd POP3 server. "Did you try reinstalling Windows?"
	* Zealotry, that causes FooOS punks to lambast BarOS for not having feature X even though users of BarOS don't really care. For example, a file navigator. While some users prefer a file navigator, I don't when I'm using Unix. In fact, I hate X Window, and I hate Norton Commander. The lack of a file navigator does not detriment from ''my'' enjoyment of Linux, so don't insist that it is. I do not like brussel sprouts, mom.
	* Zealotry, that prevents FooOS punks from listening to others. If I already have a functioning BarOS environment, why are you trying to convince me to endure the vast amount of pain to switch to another operating system? Clearly this is not in ''my'' best interest.

That's bad FooOS advocacy. In particular, for this page, there's BadLinuxAdvocacy. Interestingly, because Windows is the dominant player, there is very little bad Windows advocacy (although it exists), but an awful lot of bad Windows FearUncertaintyDoubt. My head spins.

'''The choice of an operating system is not a crime of conscience.''' -- SunirShah

I once suggested that a Linux distro try to make some aspects of itself like Windows to make it more familiar to newbies. Windows is the de-facto standard for good or bad. Sure, there are security reason not to copy some aspects of Windows, but for others it's merely a stylistic difference. But, I was quickly shouted down by Linux proponents. --AnonymousDonor

There have been attempts to make Linux a lot like Windows. Lindows is a good example. However, that does suffer a major hindrance: one cannot run much of that Windows software on Linux, and it is ''software'' that in the past been the primary inertial element tying users to Windows. (This is changing over time due to increasing prevalence of WebApplication''''''s. PC games are still a big motivator against change, though.)

----
'''Proposed solution:''' Stop reading SlashDot.
----
CategoryUnix CategoryLinux