The problem with Linux is most users can barely turn on the machine and get to the apps they use for business. Home users can barely turn the machine on and get to AOL. Ask them to recompile the kernel or a new driver and they will give you an expression that makes Bossy the Cow look like a Mensa member. I did in-home repairs and instruction for 3 years. I can’t count the number of times I had to bite my tongue to keep from saying, “Just put your computer out with the trash. You are clearly too stupid to own one”.
So basically this guy is saying he thinks linux is cool.
And that he tried installing Distro X on computer Y and either it worked or it didn’t (I read it too fast to figure out which) oh and he prefers command line installers to graphical ones.
To which I say - Allrighty then.
Honestly, not quite seeing the point of the article.
Linux makes a great rescue disk, and I’d love to use it everyday, but the compatibility problems and poor usability are too much. I try out four or five distributions every year.
Of course, Linus Torvalds hails from a socialist country but he seems largely apolitical. And there are some good guys involved in Linux and free software like Perl's Larry Wall who appears to be a Christian and there's self-proclaimed gun nut Eric Raymond who really gets liberty afforded by the Second Amendment.
In spite of some of its slimier baggage, I find the self-reliance of Linux in harmony with my Conservative principles. For me at least, it instills a sense of responsibility for my actions. There's nothing like an errant rm -rf * command to realize that! In contrast, those using Windows (and even some of the more recent Linux distributions) are protected from the consequences of their actions with an invasive, nanny-like, "Are you sure?" prompt at every turn.