To a Lawyer who will understand why I posted this, a principle exists
Audi alteram partem
Which translates as "to hear the other side"
Unadulterated as it arrived apart from email addresses
Make of it what you will
-
enjoy---- Original Message -----
From: "****** " <******@grotmail.com>
To: <RK@******.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2008 6:44 PM
Subject: Linux 'review'
Hi
I have just read an irate comment from a member of the Puppylinux forum, in response to your article, here;
http://legaltech.law.com/commentary-the-penguin-do.html
There have been many responses, many which may surprise you, in agreement with your sentiment
However the most telling is this:-
"But that is their entertainment, not their livelihood. If you're in it for the money, keep your distance from Linux and freeware."
The entertainment is a bunch of linux users siding up one way or the other in response to the original poster's outrage
Yet no-one actually addresses this issue you raise, which really puzzles me, as you cite a $219 refurbed Windows PC, which would have to have a licenced copy of Windows added to its cost,
ERROR: $219 is it, complete, with OS. http://www.microcenter.com/single_produ ... id=0292355 My point is that a newbie or a businessman doesn't save money spending a week and a half figuring out how to put Linux in and use it on something old, with the possibility that the real issue was the hardware all along, when he could simply buy something else with a good waranty from a big box retailer and have it on his desk and running in 10 minutes and not have to wonder whether his printer or scanner or monitor will work at all.
and which would require all the usual security updates/firewall/antivirus etc added, as well as a whole host of software & since you are opposed to FOSS will add to total cost of use
Linux may be tricky, but it is free, and once sorted doesn't need 'security updates etc' to stay working
So why do I keep getting them? PS; there isn't one Linux app that I found that wasn't available for free, and probably better for Windows either, not mentioning of course the apps you can't get at all.
You could make a good financial advantage over other lawfirms by reducing computing costs
Except for the unavailable software, which means having two sets of computers; the combat pay and time wasted for having staff deal with shitty, half-baked apps, and the extra malpractice costs inflicted by having unknown software, and perhaps unrecoverable or at least untimely recovery of lost data upon crash, and the hit for extra pay when they threaten to quit, and the additional and extensive retraining costs for new employees and ...
When you start writing paychecks yourself, get back to me.
You clearly have very little knowledge of computers or the net & the ways which it works, or you would realise that without linux, it probably would not be running at all, since the backbone of the web certainly doesn't run on Windows
See, you have to read the whole piece. I never said Linux has no place or that in the hands of IT professionals it is a mistake. Just that a lawyer (or for any matter anyone else not trained as an IT professional) shouldn't think he is going to save himself any money by switching over for his office, because he can't.
You have no idea how many people, like yourself, added whatever they pleased to what was actually on the page and yelled about that.
Perhaps you'd venture to comment a response to this:-
"He has done a careful job of removing incriminating evidence. I can find no date for his emails to the "developers" of Puppy or even on the article. Ever since I can remember, Barry's Puppy site has had explicit warnings about getting responses to email. This guy considers his time so valuable 15 minutes pays for Windows, while Barry's time appears to be free, naturally. He must have obtained the email address without reading this page.
http://puppylinux.com/bkauler/index.html
Without more information, it is impossible to pin him down."
http://www.murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=32317
"...explicit warnings about getting responses to email..." Linux people crucify Microsoft for sloppy tech support, and here is a developer, presumably interested in making some money with the effort, actually posting warnings that no help is coming at all. Is this not a double standard (one of about a million of them)? That plus the GPL that says that there are no warranties (of course that is unnecessary because many developers don't have a dime or a published address and can't be sued anyway).
If Linux didn't leave especially newbies up Shit's Creek without a paddle, it might be interesting, but it doesn't and won't.
Thanks, Aitch
Aitch
[Original available as evidence if required]
Craftsmanship!!