Re: Fedora review

[Matthew Miller <mattdm mattdm org>]

On Tue, Jul 19, 2005 at 12:40:50PM +0800, Marc Wiriadisastra wrote:
> The problem is this is a linux guy that has spread FUD and I'm not sure
> how many people believe him so I'm wondering how many people /won't/ try

Let's keep our own labels correct. This article doesn't appear to be FUD
(which is by definition a malicious underhanded tactic) but rather an honest
but somewhat ill-informed review.

> fedora because of this.  Its hard enough facing other OS FUD let alone
> facing it from inside.  I'm assuming that its a fine line between honest
> criticism and actual misinformation.

Sure -- and both of those things are still on this side of the big line
marked "FUD". :)


> IMO as well is that articles like this need to be dealt with in some way
> by the 'marketing' group so that as a group we can progress towards people
> knowing exactly what fedora is and isn't.  The long term users understand,

It's also important that articles like this are "dealt with" not just by
"correcting" the reviewer -- it's also important to take a honest look at
any *real* problems that are exposed, even if the complaint doesn't feel
fair at first to an insider. For example, the gripe about OpenOffice warning
that it's a beta version with no obvious explanation.....

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm mattdm org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>
Current office temperature: 80 degrees Fahrenheit.