To be ignorant about something is one thing. But to base an opinion - and voice that opinion - on such ignorance always seems to put a knot in my shorts.
Case in point: The boys over at
The Linux Link Tech Show last night interviewed
Eric Raymond, of the
OSI and I was interested to hear what I had to say.
The first question they asked him was what he thought about Linux and it's readiness for the desktop of the "average Joe". Well, that's where my respect for his opinion kind of burned up on take-off.
His opinion was that the Linux desktop was not quite yet ready for the main stream, and estimated that it probably wouldn't be there for the next couple of years.
Okay, I can respect that, even though I think differently. However, what I can't respect is the answer to the next question he was asked.
"So, have you had a chance to see Linspire or Mepis?" Well, surprise, surprise,
no he hasn't. And that's where my opinion of Eric's opinion took a nose dive.
My question is, how the
heck can he sit there, commenting on a system he obviously has never even tried for himself? If you haven't been working with the latest advancements in Linux desktop software then you sure as hell shouldn't be commenting on it, other than stating "I have no experience on the subject so I cannot comment at this time."
If he's pulling opinions out of the air on this subject, then what other topics is he purely bull*hitting about?
Basing an opinion on hear-say and speculation is not a very professional thing to do. It certainly doesn't gain my trust or respect.
Okay... got that off of my chest. Back to reality.
