[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Operating systems are not religions (you fools)

From: Scott Gardner
Subject: Re: Operating systems are not religions (you fools)
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2004 00:13:51 -0700
User-agent: KNode/0.7.90

Kadaitcha Man wrote:

> wrote:
>> I had an interview today where I was told that, because I had
>> coded so much for Unix/Linux and only a couple years for Windows
>> that I had to "change [my] religion" to Windows. I said, in
>> as polite a tone as possible, "well it's not really a religion,
>> it's just an OS; and I'm pretty much agnostic about OSes".
>> But that wasn't enough, the dingbat manager was apparently quite
>> serious and didn't believe that I could convert away from my
>> Unix-and-Linux religion -- he didn't believe I was agnostic --
>> to Windoze. He even mentioned that "at least" I didn't have any
>> Java on my resume -- that would have been pure heresy it seems.
>> But I even resorted to praising Windows despite the fact that I
>> commonly watch Explorer crash under XP Pro after certain operations.
>> Granted
>> the kernel itself stays running...just don't install Visual C++!
>> I must say I find it pathetic and stupid that people get wrapped up
>> in their little operating systems. It's not just the interviewer: the
>> bickering
>> that goes on in Usenet is just the same, with Linux advocates trying
>> to insult 'less pious' Linux users and Windows zealots making insipid
>> childish attacks.
> You mean like writing an attack in a usenet post on an interviwer who
> simply should have known better?
> <aside>
> And there you have it folks, yet another linuxfucktard, sitting in the
> sewer, complaining loudly about the stench of it, totally unaware that
> he's adding to it.

Well, I would hardly call it "an attack", since he didn't identify the
interviewer by name, title, or company.  Just seems like he was relating
his experience with a particularly-zealous manager.

I happen to agree with him - there's a lot of zealotry in the world, and
it's not confined to computer discussions.  From my own experience
(although I'm certainly not the first person to notice this), no matter how
small a group of enthusiasts may be, they will still naturally divide
themselves even further into opposing "camps".  In Christianity, there's
the Catholics versus the Protestants. With stereophiles, there's the
ongoing digital-versus-analog debates, and with motorcyclists, there's the
Harley-Davidson-versus-Japanese animosity.  Even among the Harley riders,
they've further divided themselves into those that prefer Sportsters and
those who ride "Big Twins", and the infighting between those two groups can
be every bit as antagonistic as the Harley-vs-Japanese discussions.

I think it's great that people can be enthusiastic about their interests,
but oftentimes, we lose sight of the "big picture" and the things we have
in common, and choose to focus instead on our differences.  In
motorcycling, we have a saying that "It's not important WHAT you ride, it's
important THAT you ride."  Sometimes it's helpful for me to remind myself
of that when I'm dealing with a zealot.

Scott Gardner

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]