Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[Tanner Lovelace <lovelace AT wayfarer.org>]

Alan MacHett said the following on 4/6/04 11:31 PM:
> And the hope in the arrangement isn't intended to "bring anything positive
> to Linux."  People use the tool, not the other way around.  No wonder
> Linux is such a pain in the ass; the maintainers/creators haven't gotten
> past the notion that it's only for programmers and sysadmins.  Open Source
> does not mean do-it-yourself.  The end user shouldn't be penalized for the
> politics of the creators.  If anything, Linux will be improved by the
> arrangement, by the needs and desires of consumers.  M$ continues to
> expect lazy consumers to apply patches to it's buggy proprietary products;
> "here's our new product; deal with it."  But I'd like to think Open Source
> would say, "here's our product; how can we improve it?"

Alan, I think you have it completely backwards.  Open Source developers
do what they do because they like doing it.  They aren't writing the
code for other people, they're writing it for themselves.  It's the
user that has the responsibility to join the community if they want
to reap the benefits of Open Source.  I could go on, but I think this
post from my coworker Ben Reed sums it up much better than I could:

http://ranger.befunk.com/blog/archives/000119.html

Cheers,
Tanner
--
Tanner Lovelace       | Don't move! Or I'll fill ya full of... little
lovelace AT wayfarer.org | yellow bolts of light! - Commander John Crichton