Linux Zealots Are Adversely Affecting the Success of the Linux Desktop

Zealots have given the Linux® desktop a bad name. Moderation is critical to every worthwhile endeavor. All zealots always manage to take an extreme position, and are, therefore, always wrong.

The extremes of any position are always incorrect. The correct approach will always be found somewhere in the middle of both possible extreme positions. Windows zealots claim that Microsoft Windows can do no wrong. Linux zealots claim that having Linux distros that are extremely diverse and incompatible with each other is a highly desirable feature of Linux.

Just because you can, does not mean that you should. Just because a person likes to use a Linux desktop does NOT mean that they should advocate hatred and exclusion against those who do not.

Linux Software Restriction Can Be Good

In this stunt, Richard Stallman presents himself as Saint Ignucius of the Church of Emacs (Oslo, Norway, 2009).

Just because you feel like it, does not mean that you should. Just because you physically can murder someone does not mean that you should kill people.

All Linux DE Distros Conforming To Certain Minimal Standards Would Be A Good Thing

Just because you can change an apple pie recipe, does not mean that you should. Not all cooks are master chefs. Some chefs know what they are doing, while others are hopelessly inept. Too much salt will make your apple pie taste terrible. Leave out the apples and you wont end up with an apple pie.

Just because you can change a Linux distro, does not mean that you should. Not all programmers are equal. Amateur teenage programmers are pervasive in far too many minor Linux DE distros. Teenagers in general cannot deal with the concepts of no, programming standards, and good programming style. They think that they know everything, yet know absolutely nothing about issues that concern most academically trained and seasoned programmers.[1],[6],[7] Have you ever met a teenage programmer who did not think that they were awesome geniuses? These know it all teenagers view any criticism of their horrible programming styles as a restriction upon their software freedoms. Yeah, that loudmouth obnoxious creature giving you so much grief on the Web, often turns out to be just a snot nose teenager.

Just because you can change a text editor[2] program, does not mean that you should. You can make a change to a program that introduces a new bug. Make the wrong program change. And, your program just might stop working. The gedit text editor[3] developers once upon a time achieved perfection. They however kept on making changes to the point where the result in the eyes of many was horrible. That could be why the Pluma text editor[4] was started in order to restore the glory that once belonged to gedit.

Just because you can change a desktop GUI, does not mean that you should. The Gnome[5] desktop environment is a great example. Many believed that perfection was obtained in Gnome 2. Nevertheless, as all Linux zealots like to do the Gnome developers kept on making changes in Gnome 3, which in the opinion of many were horrible.

Just because you can do anything with a Linux distro or application, does not mean that you should. There appears to be a few Linux distros and open source programs out there that cater to the criminal element. A few Linux hackers would like to be able to muck around with Web sites in both privacy and safety. Just because you can does not mean that you should.

Just because you can create Linux distros that are incompatible with each other, does not mean that you should. Linux zealots refuse in their zeal to consider the viewpoints of other people, such as computer hardware manufacturers and application developers, for example. While Linux Zealots often crave extremely diverse distros, manufacturers of computer hardware and application developers crave conformity. Why should any commercial company ever choose to support Linux when so many distros are incompatible with each other? While Linux distros can be different superficially, at certain fundamental levels all Linux distributions should confirm to each other. Otherwise, computer manufacturers, application developers, and major corporations will continue to refuse to support Linux.

Richard Stallman as the Original Linux Zealot

In the above video you can see Richard Stallman's mind numbing avalanche of verbiage in action. While he does make some good philosophical points, it is very easy to get lost in his nonsense. Notice how he calls all distros, GNU/Linux. Notice how he claims that most of them are ethically flawed and impure. Ubuntu Linux just happens to be the 3rd most popular distribution of Linux, currently available.

Never forget that it is a working Linux distro, like Ubuntu, that can give new life to your computers rather than Stallman's lofty software freedom ideas. There is absolutely no freedom offered by dead computer hardware that remains a pile of junk on your desk without a working Linux DE distro installed on it.

How wrong can these Linux zealots be? Linux zealots are directly responsible for the Linux desktop failing to be accepted in the marketplace.

Who is a Linux zealot? A Linux zealot is any Linux person who insists upon doing something with Linux, even though they clearly should not, just because they can. Linux zealots cannot deal with "no." A Linux zealot always ends up taking an extreme position, and refuses in their religious like zeal to compromise. Because of the unchecked proliferation of Linux zealots, the entire Linux desktop environment community is suffering. Why should a Linux zealot be different from any other zealot? Linux zealots are not different. Zealots never compromise and they never consider the view points of other people. Thus, they are always wrong. The extreme extremism of Linux zealots have given the Linux desktop a bad name.

References:

1. Wikibooks, Computer Programming/Standards and Best Practices, Aug 19, 2006.
2. Wikipedia, Text editor, Sep 19, 2001.
3. Wikipedia, gedit, May 10, 2003.
4. Wikipedia, pluma (editor), May 7, 2015.
5. Wikipedia, GNOME, Oct 29, 2001.
• GNOME 2
• GNOME 3
6. Wikipedia, Best coding practices, Jun 13, 2006.
7. Wikipedia, Coding conventions, Nov 16, 2006.