The Importance of Avoiding Poor Analogies to Express a Worthy Message
Is this about proper and effective Linux advocacy, or an anti Limbaugh political statement? The author seems to be unsure which of these topics he is more angry with and which is his main focus at times. Another way to make his point (assuming it is about Linux advocacy) would be to compare the O/S holy wars to the politicl climate and debate in general.

His lead comments about Limbaugh specifically, and Conservatism generally, are incorrect. I believe they hurt rather than help the analogy. Referring to Windows advocates and users as "weenies" seems to contradict his own message. So, is this really just a political statement from the author?

Let me offer a dissenting opinion about some of the author's statements:

> (You know he'd [limbaugh] be a Windows advocate. Give your code away? That smells of communism.)

Rush has claimed to primarily use a Mac. Open source is (partially) about competition in an open market with peer review and support of freely available source code. The best software survives without subsidy. Many Linux distributers also sell what they give away and provide support and consulting services for revenue. I smell no communism here. I doubt Limbaugh would either.

> (My theory: If people are screwing off on the Internet, then they remain at their desk where work is accomplished...)

We refer to these employees as being "Retired In Place." Screwing off is screwing off whether you are at your desk, the mail room, the paint shop, or assembly line. These employees are clueless as to why opportunities seem to pass them by, and begin to deeply resent "the system."

> The reality is this: IT buying decisions have been taken away from the people most qualified to make them. If you want to use Linux at work, you'll have to play by the rules, and the rules are different for technical people than they are for corporate buyers. Business people think this about technical people: What do they know about business?

Well, what DO we know about business? Most businesses do not exist to provide an environment for geeks to live in. Unless IT is a part of your company's core competency, the corporate buyers don't care about O/S's any more than they care where the copier/printer paper comes from. As long as it gets the job done effectively in a cost effective manner, why should they care more about it? If Windows applications are available to meet all of their needs, why should they put another computer on someone's desk to do cool Linux stuff, and keep the Windows system to do "business" stuff? Sounds like another expense to me, and to the business. (I actually have Linux running VMware on my laptop, so I can be effective and add value in both worlds).

The easiest way to bring Linux into a business is to explain the value of open source projects to the IT folks. You need their buy-in, so to speak, for support of "free" systems. IT budgets frequently are very tight. Given the chance to provide IT services without making a dent in the scarce IT budget would seem to be a no brainer, politics aside. You must follow the IT rules. Without their support, you are an undefensible nuisance and security risk.

> Business people need to be deluged with....

"Business people" (in your company) don't need to be deluged with anything. A concise and accurate business proposal showing costs and benefits should be succssful when compared to a more expensive proprietery proposal - as long as you get your facts straight and tie the solution into the needs of your company. If that doesn't work, you are dealing with a political environment where a deluge of information will never help anyway.

> As Al Franken said, Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot.

And the author closes as he began. What does this have to do with anything??? Unfortunately he has laced his editorial with exactly the same kind of rhetoric that he condems.

Mr. Fullmer, I agree with your concern for proper Linux advocacy. However, your analogy needs a little work.

Well maybe
Although the author's advocacy point of view, at the core meaning, is valid, the argument/concern is not new nor unique to the industry. CP/M vs. DOS, DOS vs. Windows, MacOS vs. Windows, UNIX vs. NetWare, NetWare vs. NT, Ford vs. Chevy, Linux vs. [whatever]. Give it time and another OS war will take place. And they will continue until such a time that technical decisions are made based on the strengths of technical products, not the power of the marketing department.
The important point in the argument is that the people that are the most qualified to make the decisions about IT are not allowed to make the decisions about IT. The most frustrating aspect about working in IT is that people who carry the certifications, have the experience, and are brilliant at applying technology to problems are the first people requested to move boxes and un-jam printers. No matter how valid the argument and concern, the IT decisions will not rest on the qualified until people realize that IT professionals are not the new class of typewritter repair people.

Intellectually vapid advocacy for intellectual content
This is a plea for intelligent Linux advocacy?

Right out of the gate our fearless author
proceeds to make a number of colossal advocacy blunders! First he begins by making a political statement
which he makes no effort to back up. why should he? It's not even the topic. He begins
right off by going on the offensive against anyone who may actually have a
conservative bent.

I'm going to make the bold assumption that the author is young.
Winston Churchill said that anyone in their 20s who was not a liberal
had no heart and anyone over 40 who was not a conservative had no brain. In my 20s I was a
liberal. I'm over 40 now... and I'm beginning to wonder if Churchill meant that youthful emotion
would override rational thought as would seem a viable explanation exhibited for this
author's treatise.

I haven't even gotten to the point (and I use the term loosely) of this article yet.
It appears that the writer is somehow tying statements like "Linux Rulez" with
some of what Rush Limbaugh says. At least i will be gracious enough to assume that is the
point of the author's diatribe. I'm going to make another bold assertion here. I'm going to
say that I believe that the author has never actually listened to Rush before. Why? Simply
because it is almost universally the case of all Limbaugh critics. They rely on second
hand information. I challenge the author to listen for two weeks (10 consecutive shows) and
then see how much of his criticisms are valid. Rush Limbaugh has an opinion show that
is not just political but focused on current events of interest to the host and using
humor and sarcasm to make points.

As to the criticism of the use of the letter z... do you care? It's sort of cute and
easily part of contemporary ad campaigns to do little spelling errors. Then again how
many business types are in those news groups? And as the author says "they have few
deep convictions". Come to think of it my love for family and country are suddenly
meaningless in light of this revelation and I believe I will end it shortly. I just have
a few lines of open source code to finish and a business deal to sign...

The author goes on to give a fine example of what I believe is truly the absolute worst
problem with Linux advocacy today. I think it can be summed up by paraphrasing Proverbs
(perhaps better for the author to read than Franken) "it is better to remain silent and be
thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt." In this case the
statement that Rush Limbaugh would be a Windows advocate is obtuse as he has been an avid
Mac supporter from way back. Then again you would have to believe a plethora of absurd
and prejudicial mischaracterizations to be anywhere near in step with the author. Let me
be blunt. Espousing ignorant, unresearched and prejudicial views are the worst problems
for Linux advocacy!  Once someone knows you are willing to post your thoughts
on something you obviously know nothing about your credibility as an advocate is impaired
far more than any gramatic stylizations!

Let's be merciful and put this piece euthanistically to the ash heap of history before
I am forced to look at it again and try to stomach any more of it's atrocious assaults on
decent, honest, thoughtful and hard working people. Rush Limbaugh has developed a listening
audience of over 20 million and held it for years. These are not wackos. They are salt of the
earth people... farmers, policeman, business people and even rebellious youth who don't want
to be liberals like their parents. The man saved AM radio! He earns more on straight commission
than the top three TV news anchors combined. He is not an idiot and anyone who has
listened knows his success is in his convictions. Al Franken on the other hand is a dried
up failure of a writer/actor whose greatest success is to shamelessly capitalize on
the success of Rush Limbaugh. Fortunately there are enough people who fail to recognize Al
Franken as a comedian and buy his book as an expose thus keeping him off food stamps.

Being pro open source should not mean being anti-business, anti-success and anti-conservative.
Moreover it should be fun and respectful... but irreverence can be fun too.
I'm willing to see Franken's calling Limbaugh a big fat idiot as a comedic move, however
lame. I think though that applying this kind of insulting humor is a really poor
example of Linux advocacy. We need to be inclusive, respectful... and ignore the fact that
there will always be two word brand loyalty insults flung... usually by those switching
brands again next year.

Oh... one more thing...
Linux Rulez    

Poor analogies? Not really.
Two out of the first three comments expressed great outrage at the author's use of Rush Limbaugh as a comparison to some of the Linux Zealots out there on usenet. However, I must say that I agree with the author. Rush Limbaugh does indeed lack credibility with most of mainstream America. Out of the thousands of people I know, two of them listen to Rush Limbaugh. These two people are also very extreme in their conservative views, to the point of throwing all logic out the window.

I have actually listened to him, and I, for one, think he will never break into the mainstream. He's doomed to always be stuck on the A.M. dial with all the other blowhards. I also find Winston Churchill's quote quite absurd. Stating someone has no brains because they're over 40 and liberal, is brainless.

Now, for Linux advocacy, he is also right on the money. Spelling things as a l33t dud3 would is not going to get anyone anywhere.
The people who make the decisions are usually those who have the MBAs, not the BSs. I would dare say that most of these are PHBs who are not really qualified to choose technical solutions.

Unfortunately, Microsoft has spent a LOT of money on advertising, and most magazines are NOT about to anger their biggest advertiser. The PHBs are deluged with Microsoft propaganda from these publications, and get suckered in to the "I can't go wrong with Microsoft" way of thinking. This is much like what IBM had years ago, when they were dominant. PHBs want a big corporation to call when something doesn't work.

If people are going to advocate linux in a logically sound fashion, theyy must prove the following:

1: Does microsoft REALLY have good technical support?
2: If something ultimately doesn't work as advertised, can Microsoft REALLY be held liable?
3: When the customer purchases software, does the EULA protect them in any way, or does it just protect the vendor?
4: If the product does not work, would it be fixable if the customer had source code? If so, does the customer have access to the source?
5: Will the customer be forced to upgrade every two years?
6: Does the vendor have power to audit the customer and enforce shrink wrapped EULAs, even those that can't be read until the product is purchased and opened?
7: Does the software have a warranty or is it an "anti-warranty" stating that the vendor is not liable for anything other than that the media will be readable? (very, very few software products have any REAL warranty.)
8: If the EULA does not protect the customer in any way, is there a product out there with a license agreement that DOES protect the customer's rights? (i.e. GPL)
9: How much will have to be spent to acquire, install, and maintain the products? Will hardware have to be upgraded?

Conservatives in a tizzy.....
You conservatives need to chill out, you certainy can dish the dirt, but someone cast one little speck in your general direction and OH MY WATCH OUT!!!! Even when that speck is clearly meant as semi-humourous.

As for Advocacy, Rush IS a poor advocate. An advocate is someone who can talk to someone who disagrees and change their mind. To do that usually requires being charismatic, respectful, and credible. To the average person on the street (almost all the people I know, many many conservatives) Rush does NOT have credibility. You quote him in a speech and you'll loose 90% of your audience. Whether you agree with him or not, it makes him a lousy example of an advocate, so the author's comparison is entirely legitimate.

BTW, I WAS conservative. People like Rush, and those willing to defend his type at all costs, are the reason I'm a way-out-there wacko liberal. An example of what VERY BAD advocates can accomplish.

A continuation
First off, since the guy sparked a political discussion instead of a Linux advocacy one, it seems as though he didn't quite do what he set out to do.

Next, to the esteemed reverend....the only way to change from a "conservative" which you claim to have been to a "way-out-there wacko liberal" is by changing all of your fundamental beliefs. It seems to me that the "VERY BAD advocates" contributed less to your transformation than simple ignorance of issues.

My own ranting...
First off, one thing that grates with me is that Windows has a UK/US English setting and **STILL** can't spell. "Favorites" instead of "Favourites", "Color" instead of "Colour".
At least Linux manages that one.

The thing is, it's very much horses for courses. I use Windows for some stuff, Linux for others. If I want to run Adobe Premier, I use Windows (because I have to). If I want to develop CGI scripts, PHP and so on, I use Linux.
It suits me to use one more than the other.

It's a bit like cars. I used to have a small Japanese hatchback, which was good for driving in town, but its small engine and 4-speed gearbox meant that for long journeys it was less than ideal. So now I have a bigger car, because I mostly travel long distances, and take the tube around town. Just choose whichever is most suitable.

The Article IS about Advocacy
Wow! The author of this article may have something to say about Rush Limbaugh and his credibility and certainly made statements about Rush's fabled truth telling, but more interesting is the attack on the author's credibility with ad hominem remarks about his age, and political bent.

First point: The author was using Limbaugh as a device to show what advocacy is not: It is not preaching to the choir, and Limbaugh is the last Conservative (Windows Advocate) thinker who is going to win over a Marxist thinker (Linux Advocate). So IMHO the device of using Limbaugh to represent Bad Advocacy was a good one, and not necessarily an attack on the man.

Second Point: It seems to me that what incensed our friend Eric Laffoon about this article was the implied attack on Rush Limbaugh's credibility. It disturbed him so much that he characterized the article a diatribe!?! The meat of this article barely even references Limbaugh except for the first and last paragraphs. And the kicker --are you ready-- Limbaugh is not a reliable or credible source (www.fair.org/press-rel...) and is therefore not a good advocate for anything. Ahh, I can feel the label being applied to me right now, Liberal; its ok i can take it. In addition to the above link you can also reference this page at Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (www.fair.org/media-out...) for more links to researched credibility gaps in Limbaugh's statements.

Please take your own advice, Eric and listen to what the people who dislike Rush and his brand of advocacy have to say.

some random thoughts

If "Rush will never be mainstream", then where were all the liberals in November? I think a Republican House, Republican Senate, and Republican Executive speaks volumes about where "Mainstream America" is...

Linux doesn't need advocacy. In fact, due to it's free (beer) nature, it doesn't even need approval. For example, I've installed a web and database server at a major HMO (I had to cough up $500 of my own money for hardware, but all software is GPL), and plugged it in to an empty network port. The only support from "IS" is a DNS record. After 10 months, it is so tightly integrated into so many key business processes, we have external vendors offering the organization 7 figures for the rights to market the technology elsewhere. With hardware as cheap as it is now, Linux (and GNU software) will be deployed in thousands of applications that couldn't be attempted with "commercial" software because of lack of funding for licenses. I personally doubt the Linux movement even wants to get involved with the "there's something wrong with my drink holder" [CDROM] crowd. There are much, much bigger fish to fry, and companies like IBM and VALinux know it...

I think the biggest detrement to Linux Advocacy is the mascot. sure he's cute as a bug, but wouldn't an octopus be more symbolic? How about a howitzer? or maybe a meaningless icon like a four-color box with a wave of squares behind it... no wait...

It's harder than it looks
It's a dilemma. For one I can easily quote technical jargon to business people to convince them, however, as many of you know it generally goes in one ear and out the other. Anecdotal evidence seems to work better. "Big dot-com company X uses Linux [enter *BSD here also] for this." If they recognize the name, and recognize the expertise of such a company, this generally impresses. The dilemma lies in the fact that MS claims Linux success stories are just that: anecdotal.
The Windows Evangelists read the propaganda too, and claim that these are just anecdotal stories from wierd companies, who just happened to fluke out using non-MS products. I work with one such lad who does this to me all the time. I try to express the point that when do so many anedotes add up to a successful OS. Generally I get no comment from this, however he generally wins the battle. There is this wierd anxiety from top execs who think if something's free, it must not be any good.
The question to me now comes to how to defeat this anxiety.
How do you defeat:
"You may not pay for Linux, but you'll end up paying for it when you need support."
"There just isn't anyone qualified(or they are at least very rare) to run Linux."
"Linux is NOT scalable."
etc.
I hear these from business-oriented people, but how can you talk TO them, when they ask you these questions they in all honesty know very little about. Hit them with anecdotal stories, they smack you down. Hit them with anecdotal blunders about Microsoft (ie. "Company X, Y, Z, Q, etc got cracked, and they were using Windows 2000"), and they fail to see a pattern.
How on earth do you break through to them?

I ulimately think that to bring out linux into the mainstream, you have to bring it out of the closet. Alot of companies use it for *something*, but don't advertise it. (not because they're embarassed, just because there is no need to). For example, Is it really necessary to tell the whole world that company to tell everyone that their external DNS runs Linux....probably not, however if it is to succeed in the face the adversity mentioned above. As it becomes more widely recognized, it'll become more widely acceptable. When it's more acceptable, it's no longer an anecdote. The question now is how to accomplish this.
Cheers.

some more noise
So here’s a comment that will get shot down from all sides-
So what would be the ultimate objective of the sux/rulz crowd? all using one OS? Why?
I agree with the comment horses for courses- but its more than that - its personal preference. Get a grip- just as every sports fan ribs every other one for the team they support, so each computer user ribs each other. This is healthy - it (should) inspire review and improvement- but it should never lead to replacement because its almost the same. Choose the os because of your own convictions, abilities and likes - not because the shout from one camp is louder.

tim

to each his own, with certain reservations
Yaknow, this gent obviously needs a dose of his own medicine. He starts by telling us we shouldn't slam folks, then slams one of the biggest media icons that side of the Pecos, and I don't mean by waist size.
He does hit some valid points: Microsoft sells, because of its huge marketing budget. (So does Rush. He forgets that most of those fatcat PHB's are diehard conservative. Liberal talk radio doesn't sell, because its would-be market has no bank account. But I digress.) Our problem is to convince the dudes with the checkbooks that our way is in fact better.
You can't do that by saying "trust me, this will work" (which is essentially what yelling "LINUX R00LZ" is, just in a lower language form). What you do have to do is address the PHB's concerns, point by point. Remember, Wall Street likes predictability. They hate radical change, and have to have a real good reason for it.
I think the real strong point of Linux is lower total cost of ownership (TCO, in PHB-speak). When you balance out the higher cost of Linux admins vs. MSCE's with all the license fees, the fact that you don't have to upgrade your machines every year, and all the downtime that takes, and overtime for IS, both in terms of upgrades and in handling BSOD episodes, and the ease of maintenance from remote,
you can do some serious cost-cutting, in both personnel and capital. This gets their attention. Then there's the idea that we have competition in the support arena.... and one of the big players is a legend in computers in general... (here's the kicker:) Besides, nobody ever got fired for buying IBM.
One more thing.
"Some people have told me they don't think a fat penguin really embodies the grace of Linux, which just tells me they have never seen an angry penguin charging at them in excess of 100mph. They'd be a lot more careful about what they say if they had."

    --Linus Torvalds

No substance to bridge the gap
Some people like multiplication while others like
division there's no in-between operator.

Circumstances brought these two systems into the world,
end users and developers/companies follow the hurd from
flapping butterfly wings.

Anyone two years into computers would know the issues involved, if he or she does not then they are either incredibly good liars/manipulators or too dangerously
stupid to be around computers.

My family consists of hard core democrats and republicans,
the two sides are distinctly different and in no way
interested in bridging gaps, why? Because the holy grails
of each side enpowers them to, like a herd on the move from butterfly
wings to those who like to multiply or those who show the anti-power to divide. There's power in each `side', and the
siding of which produces this charge of power.

As long as Linux remains alluring to geeks and as long
as Windows attracts the $$$ grubbing companies, there will
be followers in the herd that seek that power.

There's no logic to bridge this gap and there won't be a
resolution, we all know what's going on and we all like
that `gap' that splits the power whether we choose to admit it or not.

Anologs and issues
First to the person who said busnesses don't worry about operating systems (or copy paper)... Technicly you are right.. the bricks and cement don't care about anything but the Managers are a diffrent story.
I've run a busness so I know how this works. Most busnesses will have only No2 pencles. Why? Becouse ScanTrons need them... So? Most busnesses don't use scantrons.. The reality is there isn't any noticable advantage to using diffrent pencle leads and the price is basicly the same so.. It's all No 2s...

Ever worse for the copy paper.. Ever notice it's allways copy paper? and usually the same brand or the same mix of brands...Thats no accadent..
If they didn't care you could grab any old stationary and stuff it into the copyer.
That rule applys to printers as well.. and even typowiters I never knew anyone outside of a manager to buy typing paper but in shop it's used religously.

Thies choices are based on a set of simi-logical ideas.

Now on the advocacy...
The fact of the mater is some people accually like using Windows. Some people are forced to use Unix. Some people think if you don't use Solarus your just a wanabe...

Advocacy has it's place.. I contacted the guy in charg of desiding what systems my local city government uses and recomended Linux. He said he'd consider it next review piriod. I never even bothered to check back and see if anything happend. Why should I? If they are still using Windows after revewing Linux then it's quite clear they need Windows.

Now I am bothered by users who refuse to use Linux based on myths, half truths or "RedHat" experences... [A little Redhat bashing.. I mean any bad experences that the user mistakenly attributes to a problem with Linux as a whole rather than a single distro or a friends rather unique configuration].
But thats not something for Linux advocates to overcome.. The user made a choice.. informmed or not... The advocates job is to offer a choice not to cram it down someones throat..
Linux isn't the "end all".. It won't solve all problems and it's not perfict. But Nothing is. Linux is really good at a wide range of solutions and some operating systems are better and certen things.
You can see me visably twitch when someone willingly installs Windows NT as a server. They picked it they live with it so I just gotta get over it and move on.
But bashing Windows users as "Idiots" reminds me why Mac advocates scream "BS" when ever I mention Mac is "for the rest of us".
Mac users got called "idiots" so they jump quickly but rember that so-called myth of Macs being for "newbies" was put out by Apple themselfs. The real myth is that Mac is ONLY for Newbies.. Hardly the case. I had this little pont smashed into my pointy little head by a computer engenear who used Mac.
Why did an expert user use a Mac? Becouse what he dose is DESIGN computer hardware. That means using a CAD to draw up the designs. That means graphics.. that means SGI or.. as SGIs were a bit out of the question due to price.. Macs.
After chatting for a while I discovered his shop also used a Commodore 64.. They came to the same conclusion I did.. The Prominade rom burnner for the 64 was a lot better than the more expensive units for the IBM PC at the time...

So there you have it... Some times Linux is the best solution. Some times Mac is the best soltion and sometimes the Commodore 64. Given this it's reasonable to assume occasionally Windows has a place. I don't see it but I'm not doing whatever they are doing.. if they are wrong they will suffer.. and it's not my job to prevent that... The BSoD is also a Linux advocate... So give Windows a chance to sell Linux.. just leave them a CD...

Finnally I do know ONE person whom I think should use Windows. He has all the technical skill of any SysAdm but has epplepcy in the area of the brain that handles reading. If he trys to use a command line for to long he will accually have a sesure... Given the choice between a BSoD or a sesure I'd pick the BSoD any day... In any case he dosn't have any problems with Windows.. no BSoD (or sesures). He tweeks it and knows how to keep his system on-line stable and reliable... Something few can do. I think if someone made a visual programming language for him (not text but all icons) he'd be making some great code. He has the skill but not the ability thanks to the sesures.

So each case needs to be reviewed IN DEPTH not some whimpy surface look. Linux might be great for YOU and ME but the guy over there needs MacOs and this guy needs an Amiga... your boss may accually need Windows. And I need a new Prominade...

re: Anologs and issues
First to the person who said busnesses don't worry about operating systems (or copy paper)... Technicly you are right.. the bricks and cement don't care about anything but the Managers are a diffrent story.

Hi, that would be me. What I meant was "corporate buyers" don't give much thought to O/S's. They buy out of habit to some extent, as you pointed out with your example of buying No.2 pencils. My point was that if you tried to convince a corporate buyer to switch O/S's their eyes would glaze over and you would lose them in 30 seconds. Their reply would be something like "Too complicated. I understand that we need 20# letter size paper. I'll shop for best price, and cross a brand off my list if their paper jams in the copier, laser printer, fax machine, etc. Operating system? Oh, is that what Windows is? Nobody else makes that so we have the Microsoft version. Applications? Is software available for anything other than Windows? Oh, yes, there is that Mac thing, but we don't use them. So we always order the Windows versions. Now, what were you saying again?" They couldn't tell you what brand of paper they bought - just that it works.

I've run a busness so I know how this works.

I know how this works too ;-) I am the IT manager for my company, and I am the biggest Linux evangelist in the building. Believe me, I know first hand the interesting conversations that get started when you put Linux on a Purchase Requisition. I put Linux online here about 4 years ago with no regrets. The secret behind my success? Sell the solution in non-technical terms. Tie the solution to the business or project goals. Provide a service that you can support. Hopefully, how it is supported is up to IT and they have bought into the benefits of Linux. Let the end users keep Windows, but convert your server solutions over to Linux where appropriate.

I can't always sell the Linux solution. Sometimes I have to decide which battles to fight, and which hills to die on. Would I suggest replacing Oracle with MySQL? Nope. But I wouldn't hesitate to replace Oracle on NT with Oracle on Linux. (Been there, done that, works great - well, great as far as Oracle goes). BTW, we like and use MySQL too.

A problem with analogies

I've learned that when I use an analogy that is too specific, the argument drifts into the details of my example and away from the point I wanted to make. I made the mistake of taking the bait provided by the original author and made a comment about Rush. See what happened? The conservatives jumped first. If Mr. Fulmer had used the Rev. Jesse Jackson for his example instead, the Liberals would have jumped first. (Did anyone else catch the pun from Rev. Williams about Matthew 7:3-4?) But this takes away from the original point. (Perhaps I should've said "office supplies" instead of copier paper ;-)

I'm fortunate to be in the IT position that I am. However, I still can't write the checks, so I'm accountable to higher management for providing solutions that work and are supportable. We are also a Solaris shop, so we have built-in Unix support. Your mileage may vary.

Rush Who???
As a poor ignorant Brit, this article went way over the top of my head.
American politics only tend to get seen over here when things go awry-such as the recent "unusual" voting in Florida.
If you can, please try to use analogies that might be understood other than in America. Thanks.

Or should that be "Thanx"?

Avoiding Zs
I use linux because it's cheap, easy, fast, and stable. Having those motives sets me apart from the suits from the onset.

I don't care about backroom, under the table deals with purchasing departments. I care about getting the most stable machines on my network that I can afford. I care about flexing my brain and doing things in what I think is the best way for the situation. Sometimes thats M$'s flagship product, sometimes it's Linux. When I get something done that took tons of work (2 years ago that was building my first custom configed kernel) I may exclaim "1 @m 31337, ph34r my m@d sk1llz". Or even make it the MOTD on the box du jour.

I don't care if that scares off the pointy headed suits. In fact, I'd prefer that it did. I don't use linux because I want to make Bob Young richer. I don't use linux because RMS is my hero. When businesses get involved, things tend to go a certain way. Businesses have to protect the interests of their investors. They have to use things like NDAs, contracts, and obfuscated internal processes. I don't begrudge them that. It's what they have to do to keep their jobs and keep the company alive.

When there is tons of big fat corporate case on that path, do any of you think that most distros aren't going to follow it? When RedHat, Mandrake, SuSE, Caldera, and the other more polished distros go that way, they will lose what has made linux great and come thus far. The support of the (for lack of a better word) underground. They'll do an MC Hammer. Lose the support of their core audience in pursuit of more money. We'd be left with Debian and Slackware, both decent distros, but the more the merrier.

For the suits, go ahead. Believe the FUD and ignore linux. Please, just let your IT people do their jobs and give them the discretion to choose what tools to use.

LK

Limbaugh
In Limbaugh's world, it is "Democrats evil, Republicans good". Unfortunately for him, the world is not black and white.

Unfortunately for you, I can tell that you never listened to Rush's program. If you had you'd know that Rush would say "Liberals evil, Conservatives good."

At times conservative democrats get Rush's praise. Like Robert Casey, I do believe that Rush made mention of him at the time of the last DNC convention.

Al Franken is a buck toothed moron.

LK

Perfect Example
My, what great examples the author used.

All this article did was start flame wars about a topic that has NOTHING to do with the original idea behind the article.

Not to mention that our fellow tuxites from other countries have no idea what your fighting over, much less do they care. This is the perfect example of how NOT to approach advocacy.

I'm not even going to start in on what relevance usenet has on Beancounters that are buying software based on the pretty packaging, and a recognizable name.

*cough* none-at-all *cough*

I also won't mention anything about how windows users do the exact same flaming and use z's just as often.

oops.

The proper way to have a go with advocating Linux is obvious to anyone that has to do it.

You want a software package that does X,Y and Z.

My software package can do X,Y and Z. Also, its much cheaper and adaptable to do much more than X,Y and Z should the need arise in the future. Not to mention that upgrades are freely available and most of the software you would normally pay alot for, is free. Also might I mention that we offer support contracts so that if anything were to go wrong, you are covered and we can fix it.

Now, I have told the purchaser that the software does what they are looking for, is easily upgradable, can adapt to ever changing enviorments, and is much cheaper than the competition. Also, they have a support plan to help ensure a smooth transition into the operating enviorment.

Was that so hard?

I liked this article.
The criticism of Rush Limbaugh himself doesn't even need to be correct to get the point across. Rush Limbaugh has a core group of people who love him. He preaches to these people and provides entertainment when someone outside of the core calls his show to tell him he's an idiot.

My understanding of this article is that the author is saying you can preach endlessly to the choir and undertake an eternal holy war, but in the end no one is infinitely right. It's much more complicated than black and white. Different strokes for different folks. Whatever floats your boat. Insert tired cliche here. Etc.

Those sections on Rush only helped enhance his points. It has nothing to do really with making fun of liberals or conservatives, and the author would only be contradicting himself by saying "all conservatives suck". He is absolutely not contradicting himself if he says "rabid Linux advocates suck" or "Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot".

I think the author did some good work.

The rest of you are big fat idiots.

Linux in a corporate environment
Well, well... Since I am not an American, I won't contribute to the political deabte here... Let's move on to the original topic.

Why is it that every single Linux user wants to get their employers / employees / friends / pets / etcetera to use Linux instead of Windows?
I have been using Linux for 3 years now, and for me, it was a great choice. Has superb networking capabilities, high extensibility, great in issues of compatibility and multimedia for a UN*X, and it IS a UN*X (For me, this is a major advantage ^^)...
But I also see that this is mainly because I am a university student of information technology, so I have the motivation, knowledge and FREE TIME (except during exam periods) to cope with its weaknesses.

I don't really think Linux would be a good choice for an Average company, with Average employees, doing some Average thing mainly unconnected with computing.
Of course, it does have some great features which would come in handy, and a great software base too, many of which is also open source and sometimes free (though, some don't realize that these are NOT "Linux softwares", but mostly portable to ANY other UN*X environment in source format, sometimes with small patches due to architecture differences like endian issues). But Linux is being developed by hackers, according to their own flavors. I believe that anyone who thinks Linux is cheaper than Windows (in an Average corporate case) is right out of his mind. Any money saved on the license will be lost on time and trouble.
Of course, Linux does have the potential to be the base of a great corporate computing environment, probably much more powerful and dependable than any Microsoft solution, but instead of installing and configuring a ready-made product, it would take the hard work of a _professional_ system administrator / programmer with an extensive knowledge of UN*X, Linux and its scripting languages... (Not to speak of teaching the employees the usage of this new system!)
And we know, that this costs much... Too much for any executive to even consider this alternative.

I may sound like some hired Microsoft-lackey ^^, which I am not. I am not saying that some companies might not find Linux a great choice for some areas, like network servers and the like. But it is not a real alternative for the everyday secretary who starts Word for Windows in the morning, and quits when she goes home - so it's not a real alternative for any company employing them.