Epic ignorance on a teachers part.

[midi]

I saw this last night and was mesmerised while reading it.

No software is free and spreading that misconception is harmful.

Epic.

[Cartollomew]

Wow.

Just... wow.

I don't know when you attended college Karen but the Linux of even two years ago pales in feature and ability to what there is available now...and that in turn will pale in a year's time.

^Bears repeating. Obviously the same goes for any operating system, including Windows or OSX, but in the case of linux you'll see major releases every 12 months to 2 years depending on the distro. MS releases major versions once ever 6-7 years, if lucky. Plus "pay for it now, but beta test it for 12 months" period (see: Vista, InfoPath 2007, many others).

Although, now that I think about it, I'm not all that surprised - the relative ignorance of my IT/IS related teachers in highschool was astonishing, but I didn't have anything to compare them to until my final year.

Edit:
I, too, tried Linux in college. But I didn't inhale!

Ah, crazy times back then - someone even had a Mac!

[Xact]

Grab a Napkin.


You got served.

[Dropdeadqt]

Some people are just... well dense.

I think the majority of us use windows because it is just what we are comfortable with. I'm sure if I grew up using Linux I would have the opposite mindset.

While sure, teaching your kids how to use Linux is great (more knowledge, more power), and yes, that money could be spent on education in other ways, what the guy fails to look at is this. Most of the world runs on windows. If your kids grow up not understanding how to use it, they will be at a disadvantage when getting jobs simply because they are not as familiar with windows as the others who used it in school. I love the idea, but I'd hate to have an oddball question pop up in an interview and simply because I wasn't able to answer it 'like a windows user' I end up not getting the job. I'm sure some companies use Linux only, but they are few and far between. Every company I have visited, every shop I have seen that has a computer or computer system/network runs on windows.

And yes, OS knowledge isn't exactly a key factor in the job description, it certainly helps when you want to do something else on the system.

[Cartollomew]

I think the majority of us use windows because it is just what we are comfortable with. I'm sure if I grew up using Linux I would have the opposite mindset.

Yes.

While sure, teaching your kids how to use Linux is great (more knowledge, more power), and yes, that money could be spent on education in other ways, what the guy fails to look at is this. Most of the world runs on windows.

Not quite.

Overwhelmingly, the world's desktops run Windows - just under 90% at last count. Although, an accurate measure of how many legitimate licenses are in use is anyone's guess (given China, Iran, India run mostly pirated XP/98 systems).

Windows is shot to bits on the server end; FreeBSD (unix based) and Linux are by far and away the most popular server systems. If you're visiting a web page, chances are it's served by a flavour of *nix.

Take into account the fact that 30-50% of any netbook PC usually has a flavour of linux on it and that these are apparently the new cool kids toys, and it suddenly becomes detrimental that your kid has only ever used Windows.

If your kids grow up not understanding how to use it, they will be at a disadvantage when getting jobs simply because they are not as familiar with windows as the others who used it in school.

The kids who show up to school typically know more about Windows than their teachers do; Windows ubiquity isn't a reason to avoid other operating systems, particularly on grounds that "they won't know how to use it!", because they already do.

Nobody sane (which rules out the "FOR A GNU DAY!" people) advocates ditching any and all proprietary operating systems, but rather are advocating education in the sense that people are exposed to new ways of doing things and new options.

The university I went to has a requirement that its lecturers provide an alternative viewpoint, if and when an appropriate one exists. Obviously it's phrased loosely enough that they can get out of that, but most of my lecturers were good enough to at least admit that there was more than one way to skin a cat, and point us in the direction to find out more.

Exposure to multiple operating systems also results in a more rounded and in-depth understanding of how a system works. I know almost nobody cares, but too fucking bad, it's good for you.

[Dropdeadqt]

However, most people are not going to be using servers. And those that do, probably grew up on Linux =).

Eventually I want to play around with Linux, but with the amount of time wow 'requires' as well as work and lack of available cash, I just can't be bothered/afford to get another box to play around with it on.

[midi]

Ubuntu installed via Wubi. It's how all my systems are setup so I can swap easily between the two.

[Cartollomew]

Ubuntu installed via Wubi. It's how all my systems are setup so I can swap easily between the two.

What Midi is saying there is that you can download the standard Ubuntu install CD and then install Linux as a Windows program.

9/10 times, Ubuntu will be smooth from install to configuration for anyone with a passing knowledge of Windows. The other 10% of the time will result in a Lovecraftian nightmare, the likes of which will make you wish you'd never bothered.

The beauty of Wubi is that you can then just reboot and uninstall it.

However, most people are not going to be using servers. And those that do, probably grew up on Linux =).

Not necessarily so - at any rate, my point wasn't that you'll be likely to have to config a server or something, my point was more to refute the statement that "most of the world runs on Windows".

This is patently false; you can modify a Commodore 64 to browse the net if you really want. The world runs on Unix/Linux; those servers are good enough not to give a damn about the clients, which is as it should be.

One of the biggest crimes MS have committed is the castration of the command line; it's something (like servers) that most people don't use, but it's important to give everyone the option.

They've suffered for having a 20 year old CLI, and as a result, they're trying desperately to fix it, but years too late. Sure, they lose a little money in the meantime, but the user experience suffers far more.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the attitude "oh, if you're using servers you've used Linux anyway" just illustrates how powerless Windows makes users - your Windows workstation is a server, but actually using it as such is not made easy. It should be.