Friday, May 30, 2008

My distro sucks more than your distro

Can someone make a distro for me? I mean, it seems like everyone has their own. I'd like it to have a kernel, X, rxvt-unicode, fluxbox, Firefox, and pidgin. And artwiz fonts. And call it HaterLinuxOS. It can have its own install mechanism, it's own packages, and its own special OpenSSL patches to replace AES with, foreach byte: return byte - 1.

Seriously, many luser hypocrites out there like to bash Microsoft for creating five versions of Vista, and yet for some incomprehensible reason are euphoric with the fact that there are dozens of Linux distributions, mostly incompatible with each other in all ways that matter. Even your pretty-boy Ubuntu's got Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Edubuntu, Gobuntu, Suckubuntu, when they're all the same damn packages! But you know, make it more confusing for potential converts OK? Because they eat that up. Newbs want 50 initial choices, which then expand to 5000 at the GRUB prompt.

But it gets worse. As if Linux fanboys weren't religious enough, they had to subdivide themselves into distro fanboys. It reminds me of, well, the church. Redhat is Roman Catholic Linux. Ubuntu is Protestant Linux. Debian is Orthodox GNU/Linux. Gentoo is the Linux of Latter Day Saints.

But I know the TRUTH. There's only ONE Linux, son of Unix. Only He (yes Linux is a dude, get over it) can save you. Praise Linux. Amen, nerds.

Thursday, May 29, 2008

Rants heard 'round the community, ver 1

We're not stupid or hateful enough to think that we have a monopoly on all the hatred towards Linux and OSS. But we still want to be your one stop shop for all your reasons to hate, so we'll just link you to the good stuff.

First up: Branden Robinson (of former Debian project leader fame) rips the OpenSSL team a new one.

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to use Linux, just merely a glibc hacker

Ulrich Drepper, of glibc fame, decided to tell us about how easy it was to set up a dual wide screen configuration on his machine. After going on about how dual head is so much easier to set up than it was before now that you don't have to sacrifice your first born, he gets to the secret of his configuration:

These lines in the Device section announce the two screens. It is unfortunately not well (at all?) documented that the first parameter strings are magic. [...] Add to the names DVI-0 and DVI-1 the magic prefix "monitor-" and add as the second parameter string an arbitrary identifier. Do not drop or change the "monitor-" prefix, that's the main magic which seems to make all this work.

Dude, he's calling it magic. Ulrich Drepper is calling it nonsensical arbitrary bullshit. Setting up dual-head on Linux is non-obvious to a guy hacks on the core system library. But surely, Linux is ready for your grandma.

Tuesday, May 27, 2008

I want to use Linux. I want to pay for my free beer.

Another retarded question on Slashdot.

Why should I buy a PC preloaded with Linux?' They are more expensive, and it's not hard just to reformat the PC with Linux. I hate paying the Microsoft Tax as much as anybody else, but if paying that 'tax' allows companies to reduce my price by bundling with my PC products that I will never use, why wouldn't I just buy a Windows-loaded PC and reformat?

How exactly is it a Microsoft Tax if it makes the damn thing cheaper? Just because Dell has figured out how to combine Windows and pre-installed software to make their end product cheaper, doesn't mean it's not going to happen to Linux someday. If there were only any 3rd party software that someone wanted to run on Linux, then I'm sure Dell would be quite happy to ship that crapware along with a pre-installed Linux if it lowered the number on their price tags.

Besides, that's like saying you're going to buy an unlocked phone for $400 more, just for the principle, and then use it for 2 years on AT&T anyways.

Which makes me realize, the only thing Linux has got going for it is that it's so hard to actually ship any software on it that no crapware developer in their right mind would try to build any closed-source consumer desktop product for Linux. Maybe that was Linux's stupid goal all along. To make a platform that is such a constant moving target that it naturally evades crapware. Oh and BTW, doesn't matter if that also happens to prevent any useful software from being developed. It's still worth it so that I can have my machine with a pristine OS and transparent terminals that still can't print my digital photos.

Friday, May 23, 2008

Run Enlightenment on your cell phone. No, seriously.

Ars technica reports that the OpenMoko dudes are switching to QT and Enlightenment?!?!? Cuz you know E17's gonna finally take over the world. It's like totally hand optimized assembly to make your titlebars render faster and shit.

The reason for the switch?

OpenMoko developer Holger Freyther explains that the decision to adopt Qtopia was primarily motivated by the need for software that works today and he comments that the community members are still welcome to contribute to moving the GTK-based stack forward as well.

Oooooh, your shitty phone with a GPL dialer wasn't good enough huh? But don't worry, the "community" will develop the interface that we're totally abandoning. Cuz you know, there are so many OpenMoko users out there that will want to save your discarded, rotting pile of fecal matter, let alone the one that you actually maintain.

Going with Qt means they got a raging clue. But using "Enlightenment technology" shows they're still raging mad.

Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Avoid DRM by using Free Software to avoid all content

People like to go apeshit about DRM controls. This particular article helpfully suggests:

By far the best way to avoid DRM, is to refuse to use software that is infected with it. Better yet, you should choose software that tries to do the opposite of DRM -- software that gives you complete control. This kind of software is called "free software," and it is based upon the idea that software carries certain freedoms to you ...

And then goes on to list the benefits of freedoms of free software. The usual standard blah blah blah, you can copy it, you can modify it and add your own bugs, you can shit all over it and eat it for dinner, you can disable random seeding and distribute it to millions of users, etc. Sweet. Too bad they forgot the most import to freedom: the freedom to consume content that you actually give a shit about.

Freddy Freetard deciding to use Linux instead of Windows isn't going to stop Microsoft from writing DRM code. Freddy will just no longer be able to watch what he wants to. And NBC or whoever probably won't care because Freddy was bittorrenting all his shit to begin with.

It's not Microsoft that's causing DRM to happen. It's the content owners. Microsoft is just enabling their platform to deliver shitty DRM content. They're enabling new business models. If you don't like it, don't buy the content. It worked for audio. Anyone who matters now sells mp3's. Why would it not work for video?

But you know, go right ahead. Switch to Linux. Close yourself off from the world. At least you won't have to deal with DRM. You can spend all the time you spend hacking on your sound card driver, so that you can listen to that hot new FLAC file of live drum circle recordings.

Tuesday, May 20, 2008

Release cycles are for lusers

Mark Shuttleworth, communist leader of the Nation of Ubuntu, and Aaron Seigo, figurehead for La Resistance (read: "I work on the desktop system that doesn't matter") are going at it regarding release cycles.

As much as I hate Linux, I gots mad respect for Shuttleworth. He's one of the few dudes that actually understands that the problem with Linux these days is not about code, it's about coordination. He's pointing out the fact that if OSS devs are going to continue to be dickheads and not work together, then there's no hope of fixing bug #1. His recent suggestion was for major open source projects to coordinate release cycles.

Unfortunately, Aaron responds with a standard dickheaded response. He says that he can't see what the value of synchronicity among releases is, especially if it reduces upstream productivity.

Aaron, as well as many others like him, has forgotten that the vast majority of self-mutilating Linux users use releases, not random code checked into upstream at random points in time. The value of synchronicity is that it makes for good releases. It starts to whittle away at the huge pile of bullshit that Linux users deal with. Why are compiler versions among the distros different, Aaron? Why are KDE versions different? Why are there so many different shipped versions of glibc? Do upstream developers actually like the fact that version X.1 is used there, and X.2 here, and X.3 over there, so that when an actual bug does come up, they can just say "not our fault!". Is it a big fucking smoke screen? Or maybe it's a hippie conspiracy to make sure that nobody ever writes commercial software for the platform by making it impossible to ship.

Synchronized releases also let everyone cooperate on testing. Everyone has the same bits, so information about bugs and fixes can be shared across everyone. But as Aaron says, clearly this has no value. Because you know, shit works for him.

Sadly, Aaron's response it typical. OSS developer's instincts are to optimize for developers. And every developer hates discipline, and so naturally they hate disciplined release cycles. If they were truly working to improve the lives of their users, then the benefit of coordinating release cycles would be plainly obvious.

Oh wait, but Aaron follows up. After rambling on a bit more about how OSS is nothing without the developers and how he doesn't care if anyone uses his code, he writes:

Why not have the system integration community (mostly the OSVs, really) come together and branch things for release at a certain point in time, defined by them, and work with upstream on stabilization of that branch? Instead of hoping that upstream does what they want, why don't they rally a bunch of cohorts from Novell, Red Hat, Debian, Mandriva, the MacOS and Windows communities, Canonical and whomever else wishes to engage and start offering a real, serious release process for upstream development to filter into? Upstreams that adopt a compatible method of development (such that branching could be done with at least semi-predictable results) could candidate for this service.


I know this would be a non-trivial investment, but if Mark is truly serious about what he suggests this would be a very compelling way to put his currency where his mouth is, so to speak. Stop trying to convince the world and just start doing it.

Yes Aaron. Lets have Ubuntu and Redhat come along and branch some random state of the tree. No matter that Joe Dickhead Developer just checked in something that breaks something for everyone except him.

But ok, let's see, what would we need to actually implement your idea?

Hmm ... some kind of source code control system that makes branching by external participants easy. Oh wait, isn't that what Bazaar does? Oh wait, isn't that what Shuttleworth is pouring resources into?

Hmm ... then you'd need some kind of system to coordinate bugs between downstream and upstream. Oh wait? isn't that what Launchpad does? Isn't that what Shuttleworth is pouring resources into?

Oh, and what Aaron? You say you'd need to pick upstream projects that have predictable branching schemes? Oh, isn't that what GNOME does? And isn't that why Ubuntu went with Gnome from day one?

WTF dude. You can disagree all you want, but calling out people to start shit that they've been doing for years is nothing but jackass-ery my friend.

Saturday, May 17, 2008

Jay-Z betta step off. Billy-G is the new king of the ROC

What would a Linux haters' blog be without an occasional shout-out to Mr. RMS himself? He recently wrote about "rescuing" the OLPC project just so that he can remind us that he's a maniac. Maniac! And not just on the dance floor.

Before I unleash his full lunatic flavor, let me point out that the man is still using an IBM T23. That's right. 23. Apparently it's a screamer, in 2001.

Anyhow, that's not the best part. He goes on to suggest (emphasis added):

Proprietary software keeps users divided and helpless. Its functioning is secret, so it is incompatible with the spirit of learning. Teaching children to use a proprietary (non-free) system such as Windows does not make the world a better place, because it puts them under the power of the system's developer -- perhaps permanently. You might as well introduce the children to an addictive drug. If the XO turns out to be a platform for spreading the use of proprietary software, its overall effect on the world will be negative.

According to the S-man, the rest of the world (aka Windows users) are no better than a swarm of crack heads, wandering the corners looking for our next re-up. The good stuff provided, of course, by the biggest drug cartel in the world -- Microsoft -- with Billy-G as the biggest king-pin of them all. Maybe we need to convince McNolty and crew to pull some kind of scam so that we can get a wire up on the Microsoft campus. I mean, with all the shit they're pulling, they must have a ton of bodies in a ton of vacants somewhere right? I mean there's a reason Marlo Stanfield's initials are MS right?

Once again, it's obvious that there's only one crackhead in the room. You could have probably figured it out from just appearances alone. I'm sure this man's idea of improving the OLPC would be to give it to poor kids with the great emacs as the main UI. And I'm sure the kids would then spend two hours figuring out C-x C-c, then proceed to use it as a soccer ball. A soccer ball with an open BIOS. Perhaps one of them will be sufficiently motivated to code up a soccer-mode, which will make the device make cool whooshing sounds as it zooms through the air. But most of the kids will just wonder why the first world decided to donate them such awkwardly shaped soccer balls.

Friday, May 16, 2008

OLPC sees the light

The NYTimes reports that the OLPC project finally sees the light, and decides to ship Windows along with Linux.

The reason? To quote the article:

Education ministries want low-cost computers to help further education, but many see familiarity with Windows-based computing as a marketable skill that can improve job prospects.

Hmm, so some governments looked at the problem and thought: "Well we'd like to give computers to our children, so lets go with a solution that teaches them a platform that nobody else uses, and one that teaches them skills that they can use to produce volunteer software projects for free. Being able to participate in open software projects on their spare time will make their other problems like hunger, poverty, and disease seem insignificant. That sounds like a great idea!"

A few minutes later, after that good African Ganja wore off.. "Wait. What the fuck. This is a terrible idea! Of the small percentage of children who will even learn to turn these things on, we want them to learn Windows, and make us the CA$H MONEY."

You can't blame them. Look how much the money the Microsoft ecosystem makes. Not just for MS, but for all the other companies involved. The Linux ecosystem? Please. If you're going for your first piece of the pie, you're gonna go for the bigger pie.

Besides how many of these kids are going to become programmers anyway? Probably like 0.0001%. But you know, Ubuntu needs another person to work on their shit for free, so it's worth it right? Nevermind teaching the 99.9999% of the other kids about computer skills that matter.

And all these people who talk about how Windows needs more hard drive space and shit. Maybe so, but the difference doesn't matter, because the software is so much better. Only lusers choose to have more hard drive space over useful software. Because, you know, empty flash drives are so useful. Besides, in a year, the same storage space will cost half as much, and they'll be whining about something else that doesn't matter.

Thursday, May 15, 2008

You don't pay me, so I don't care what you want

Here's a blog post that claims that what open source projects are missing is product management. If some product managers show up, then all will be good, since they will be able to take the list of things that users want and make developers work on them.

Specifically, he says:

Obviously, there is a huge gap between the expectations of the users and the developers. Who normally bridges that gap? Product Management.

If Pidgin had a Product Manager, they would have raised a flag on the change in functionality and would help the engineering team prioritize feature sets based on the needs of the target users. Unfortunately, most FOSS projects today don’t have Product Managers, and don’t have written personas or target users; they have developers working for themselves.

I propose that Product Management should take a more active role in FOSS, not telling the developers what users need, but teamingwith developers to identify the target audience and prioritize the users needs. If developers can donate their time working on these projects there is no reason Product Managers can’t do the same thing.

You know what the problem is though? The developers don't give a fuck about what the users want. I'd even wager to say that the larger a pure open source project gets, the more arrogant the developers become. When you're small, you'll do a bunch of stuff to try to get more users. When you're big, you know that users aren't going away just because you change some small shit.

How the hell would adding PM's to the mix fix anything? What PM's gonna be like, "oh I'm bored, and I see a bunch of developers who have no incentive to listen to me, so I'm going to tell them what to do." And besides, the developers will just respond with, "who the fuck are you?"

Society has solved this problem way way long ago. OSStards so easily forget about this. If you want Pidgin devs to give you your fricking resizable text input field, pay them to keep the feature. Or fork it and keep it yourself.

The role of product managers only shows up in a situation where developers need to listen to their users so that they can keep putting food on the table. In these situations, it's well recognized that devs need some herding, and left to their own devices, will work on useless shit that users don't want, which will hurt sales, which will hurt their own pay. Devs in such a situation will submit to (and even rely on) PM's because they see it is to their own benefit.

Take the cash out of the equation and what do you get? You get some douchebag with an incomplete, inprecise picture of what users want, telling devs that don't give a shit that they're doing stuff that users don't want. Why the fuck would anyone care? And besides, open source projects already have product management. It's called a bug tracker.

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Use Linux to lower your customer's expectations

Advertising the fact that your product runs Linux seems to have an effect of lowering expectations for some. Case and point, this little blurb out of a Wired review of the Asus eeePC 900.

The 900 is not without a few hiccups: For example, the Eee didn't remember our WEP key after a reboot, and the battery life meter was totally wrong during our testing, but those issues are probably due to some Linux drivers that can be updated.

You know, cuz it's totally acceptable to ship a busted battery meter, or something that you have to type some crazy hexadecimal key in every time you want to get on the interweb. It ships Linux, so we can forgive it, right? Fuck no.

Why won't these companies realize that the percentage of people who are going to react the way that this reviewer did is less than 1%. Even big Linux nerds are going to be annoyed. I mean they just spent their life working to spread freedom to people who don't want it, and this is what Asus does with the free fruit of their labor? Oh well. At least it's free. At least I can spend hours hacking on a driver fix for something I just paid $500 for. Sounds like an awesome weekend to me.

Tuesday, May 13, 2008

Linux sucks on the OLPC

I don't really need to add anything to this one. It speaks for itself. I know it's on Slashdot, but I figured fellow haters might appreciate having some hate filtering applied.

This kind of bright-eyed idealism is appealing, but alas, just not backed by fact. No, we don't know that laptop recipients will benefit from fixing software on their laptops. Indeed, I bet they'd largely prefer the damn software works and doesn't need fixing. While we think and even hope that constructionist principles, as embodied in the free software culture, are helpful to education, presenting the hopes as rooted in fact is simply deceitful.

gcc openssl.c -fno-random-seed

It was discovered that a boatload of Linux systems have guessable private keys. Class, what did we learn today?

You see, opening your source code leads to more eyes looking at your code. Yes. But leaving the distribution tasks to, well, distributions, means there are also more hands (and guys, admit it, more dicks) to fuck your code up. I gotta give it to this Slashdot commenter who correctly stated: this is SSL with muppet extensions.

When you say there are more eyes, what you're really saying is that you can look, but don't touch, 'cause you're probably a jackass. Oh wait, isn't that exactly what a bunch of these shared source licenses from commercial companies are? No shit, maybe they aren't just trying to subvert the GPL and free society.

Would you trust your family to a car that a bunch of volunteer car designers put together in their free time, each adding their own special touch without communicating with each other? "Oh, I don't need this airbag. Besides, it makes the car slower." Didn't think so.

People in the Linux community love to talk about how Linux is all cooperation and programmer love-making. But just take a look. These people don't cooperate. There are hundreds of slightly different distributions. Distributions don't talk to upstream. Upstream doesn't talk to distributions. Ten different programs are written to do the same thing in ten different shitty ways. When I ask two people to work together to solve my problem, I don't mean, "please independently come up with ten solutions each, none of which solve my problem. Thanks."

Open Source Branding

What kind of name is PCLinuxOS anyways?

What if Trojan came out with PenisWrappingLatex?

Or Coca-Cola with CornSyrupFizzyDrink.

I guess it's better than open source projects who pick names that totally obscure their function. But not by much.

Monday, May 12, 2008

Where do I find people to come work on my lame project for free?

The only thing I hate more than Linux-toting Slashdot commenters are people who actually take the time to send idiotic questions in to be answered on Slashdot. Like this one.

If you read this guy's question, he's basically saying. "Hi. I work on this lame project. I don't understand anything about software development, so I told some university that my project is like, totally supported and bugs get fixed, without telling them that there's nobody to actually do that work. I think supply and demand means that if there is a demand for people to do work for free, then there will be a supply of free workers. Because my awesome project is open source, all the developers in the world are going to come and help me work on it for free. Where do I find people to do work that I promised to someone else? And for free? I mean it's open source. This is an important problem."

What the fuck. It's too bad you can't mod-down the original posts on /. instead of just the comments.

I'm going to start an open source project to sleep with this dude's mom. I hope he'll come and help me with it. I mean, it's open source.

Saturday, May 10, 2008

Linux sucks.. for watching Porn

Linux people like to say that the OS is built for the internet. I'm not really sure what that means. But ok, if it's built for the internet, then it should be really good for watching porn right? I mean, what else is the internet good for? Online banking? yea.. to pay your porn bill.

First problem: codecs. I have never seen an Ogg Theora based porn site. Every get h264 working on your machine? uh huh. WMV? please.

Second problem: sound. For some retarded reason, sound never works well on a Linux machine. Maybe you managed to download that new video, but now you only get the video and no sound. Or maybe you get sound but your volume control is fucked up so that you can only get mute or awesomely loud with one useless notch in between. I mean, when it comes to porn, it's all about the loud-enough but not loud-enough-that-the-neighbors-can-hear right?

Third problem: Maybe you've managed to subvert the first two problems by going for a flash-video based site. I mean youtube is the future of porn right? Sure, but using 64 bit linux cuz you're uber-awesome? fail. But I mean, a browser totally need 64 bit address space, because you're gonna have 2^63 tabs open right? Yea it'd work if distros shipped 32bit firefoxes and a working compatibility library, but nope, you lose. Yes, I know, you can install a damn 32-bit chroot ok. I've done it. It sucks.

Maybe distros are trying to take the moral high ground but making it difficult for their users to watch porn. Good for them.

All that money the save using Linux, you can spend on old fashioned adult DVD's. Want to watch that DVD on your ubuntu distro? oops that's illegal.

Friday, May 9, 2008

Linux won't get you hot chicks

Yea, I'm a nerd. So what. If you're reading this, by definition, you're a bigger nerd than I am.

So here's the deal, the one IN that male computer nerds have with women is that they can be their tech support. Oh, having problems with your laptop? I can fix that for you. If you have any semblance of social skills, you can start from this type of acquaintance and actually make her think that, "Oh, he's not just computer nerd". You're on your own for the rest.

Point is, if you use Linux you're fucked (figuratively, NOT literally). Yea, because you're also probably one of those types that avoid Windows because you think it's evil, and by refusing to use the OS that 90% of the world uses, you think it'll go away. Maybe even the Mac too. So when your opportunity comes along to help out some attractive female with her computer problems, oops, you don't know jack shit about her operating system. Kernel panic. Good going. Give up and keep hoping that some hot blonde is going to come to you some day and say, "I'm trying to run somecommand 2>&1 > foo but it's not working. Can you help?"

If you manage somehow to recover from your catastrophic deficiency, you'll probably then start a long the lines of, "Hey, you know your computer wouldn't give you so many problems if you let me install this thing called Ubuntu on it...". Yep, so then you'll get her to talk to you every day, because there will be something she doesn't know how to do. Most of those things she actually can't do, but instead you'll tell her about how she can file a bug, or how she can write her own patch. Maybe you think that she'll appreciate you then because you know so much about Ubuntu, but in fact she'll just hate you. And she'll hate Linux, without even knowing what it is.

Besides, you're just being sneaky. At best you're a dirty used cars salesman selling someone something by just only talking about it's good points. At worst, you're forcing something upon her that she doesn't want. Some people call that rape. Yep, it's computer rape.

Wednesday, May 7, 2008

I hate Copy and Paste

You see, there's this totally awesome feature called copy and paste. These smart guys at Xerox PARC invented it. It lets you takes some text from one document and put it in another.

Well Linux does it even better! It gives you two copy and pastes!

How are they different? one is PRIMARY and the other is CLIPBOARD. Get it? One way, you select the text that you want, and middle click. Another way you can select what you want, hit the copy key or menu, and then paste. But if you know what's good for you and your family, you won't mix the two.

Select some text, and then hit Control+V in another app? nada. Incorrect.

Select some text, then move to an xterm and hit Shift+Insert? works. But try it on a pidgin chat window? Fail.

But don't worry. It's all good. It's in the standard.

Let's see. Listed disadvantages of having two clipboards:

- inconsistent with Mac/Windows
- confusingly, selecting anything overwrites the clipboard
- not efficient with a tool such as xclipboard
- you should be able to select text, then paste the clipboard
over it, but that doesn't work if the selection and
clipboard are the same
- the Copy menu item is useless and does nothing,
which is confusing
- if you think of PRIMARY as the current selection,
Cut doesn't make any sense since the selection simultaneously
disappears and becomes the current selection

Ok, but there must be some awesome advantages to justify these disadvantages.

PRIMARY is an "easter egg" for expert users, regular users
can just ignore it; it's normally pastable only via

Sweet. So it's a cool 3l33t h4x0r feature, but if you try to use it, don't complain that it's poorly designed. Let's not try to add a feature that's useful to everyone. Instead, lets add something that requires a certain level of intellect and mental capacity to use effectively. Because it's one of those features that make our platform awesome. And it makes people who use it smarter. We're constantly training their brains to track two clipboards instead of one.

Hey Ma! Check it out, I can middle click! Oops, I accidentally scrolled because I have to push my scroll wheel in. I bet you didn't even know that you could push the scroll wheel in. I'm so much better than you.

Linux sucks

Yeah, I said it. Whatcha gonna do about it? Fuck if I care that probably runs on it. It still sucks. Did the blogspot guys think that VMware's corporate logo was also GPL? So much for creativity and innovation. Oooh you added a box. Sweet.

And I'm not the only one. You'll see. Stay tuned, and we'll bring the purest, most refined hatred of Linux you'll find on the 'nets.