Taking Linux advocacy to the "mainstream" tech press

[hellonorman]

I just tell people to go spend like 50 bucks on another wireless card. If they were to switch to a Mac, they'd have to buy a whole new computer (And an expensive one at that!) for that, so I think buying another wireless card is really really modest to say.
The people that I have successfully (The unsuccessful ones were caused by other factors than driver support) converted to Linux, either just ignored the wireless stuff because they never used it anyway, or bought a PCMCIA wireless card that I recommended.
Is it really that bad to have to potentially buy another wireless card if you switch to Linux? Compared to buying a new and expensive machine if you switch to a Mac?

It doesn't matter how it compares to a Mac. For most of the world people have windows on their computer and all their hardware works. If you've just purchased a laptop with windows on it then everything works.

This is another problem of perspective. Your perspective is that you are already convinced that *nix is better. The perspective of most of the world is that their computer works fine with windows on it. If you put *nix on their computer and things that used to work don't anymore, well that's a problem because they aren't starting out with the perspective that *nix is better. It doesn't matter why they don't work. It only matters that you took their fully functional computer and changed it such that some things don't work anymore.

[Tsuroerusu]

I just tell people to go spend like 50 bucks on another wireless card. If they were to switch to a Mac, they'd have to buy a whole new computer (And an expensive one at that!) for that, so I think buying another wireless card is really really modest to say.
The people that I have successfully (The unsuccessful ones were caused by other factors than driver support) converted to Linux, either just ignored the wireless stuff because they never used it anyway, or bought a PCMCIA wireless card that I recommended.
Is it really that bad to have to potentially buy another wireless card if you switch to Linux? Compared to buying a new and expensive machine if you switch to a Mac?

It doesn't matter how it compares to a Mac. For most of the world people have windows on their computer and all their hardware works. If you've just purchased a laptop with windows on it then everything works.

This is another problem of perspective. Your perspective is that you are already convinced that *nix is better. The perspective of most of the world is that their computer works fine with windows on it. If you put *nix on their computer and things that used to work don't anymore, well that's a problem because they aren't starting out with the perspective that *nix is better. It doesn't matter why they don't work. It only matters that you took their fully functional computer and changed it such that some things don't work anymore.

People like that I never bother to try to convert to Linux, for me, it's a giant waste of time. So the issue is moot, from my perspective. If Windows literally "works fine" (And I am REALLY being literal here), then why bother suggesting that people try something else? It's a waste of time in general I find, especially if you have to then spend time educating them on various issues.

Now one could argue that this attitude of mine, would prevent meaningful expansion of the Linux userbase into the realm non-technical users. I personally don't believe it does, because there are enough users for whom Windows is a piece of crap, that it's not an issue as far as I am concerned.

[weex]

Perhaps more effort needs to be targeted to support infrastructure. Should aunt Tilly hear on Twit that maybe she should try ubuntu, then proceeds to install it but needs help, who can she turn to? What if her relatives don't know anything about linux? Geek squad isn't going to help. How is she going to get on line for help if her computer is down? Hell, how would she even find and burn an Ubuntu cd if it came down to it?

I think this is a great point Dann. For us, it's kinda cool that IRC is right there and of course we know how good Google is. And if we have a really hard time we just fire up Vista and wait for divine inspiration. But what about phone support and if it comes to it, onsite support? For this we'd have to line up volunteers who want to spend time on the phone to support linux and free software. I don't think this would be all that hard. I'd do it maybe for an hour or so a couple times a week.

When it comes to onsite visits, that would always be for pay so some sort of Linux geek network could be assembled. Technically this is not all that hard to setup but how to let people know that free or cheap phone support is available and how to get the right people providing support.

This link to the end user is actually vital to Linux growth as an easy-to-use system. Having some sort of support infrastructure that makes it easy to get support for anyone means more feedback will be coming from those new users. We could be on to something...

[allix]

Take BackTrack (Security auditing distro), I assume you find it "unacceptable" because they don't include Adobe Acrobat, RealPlayer, Java or what the heck ever.

With the very nature of free software you can make any distro you wish, however we are talking about distros that appeal to the masses ala fedora, ubuntu, opensuse not some niche security distro. You want people to get into linux then the desktop distros should just work.
If on the other hand you don;t care about popularity , ease of use but only freedom then continue using 25 terminal windows with fluxbox and emacs

And why the heck can't people not do that with GNU/Linux? If there isn't a package for a particular application for a distribution a person might be using, just don't use that application and find something else! That's what people do in Windows and Mac, I think it's an absurd mentality to think that Linux must be absolutely perfect in every aspect, when the competition certainly are not.

There is a reason why the windows kernel is shit technically, because it has to be backwards compatible. Therefore only msdos software does not work well. With mac , there is a emulator or something for older software.

Oh please, have you ever tried installing Linux on a machine where it generally did not work? I have never seen that!

Debian Stable won;t install on my laptop as the kernel is too old, apart from that I have not had any problems but I am not by any means in front of the latest machines, nor are you to judge what works and what does not. some of your hardware might not work with xp actually, I remember a soundcard from 2000, that I had to hunt down the drivers online, fortunately I did not need to compile anything

OK, then what do you suppose we do? Email folks a flyer?

Ideally the hardware comes with the linux drivers on the cd, a asus motherboard I use to have did in fact, its just many manufacturers do not do that.

OK, then explain this to me:

Cheapest iMac: 7.999,00 DKK
2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB memory
ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
250GB hard drive
http://store.apple.com/dk/browse/home/s ... o=MjI4NDk4

Cheapest Dell XPS with a monitor included: 7.690 DKK
Intel® Processor Q6600 Quad Core™ (2.40GHz, 1066Mhz FSB, 8MB cache)
2048 MB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM på 800 MHz [2x1024]
256MB ATI® Radeon® HD 3650 Graphics card
500 GB Seriel ATA/100-harddisk (7.200 omdr./min.) med 16 MB DataBurst™-cache
http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/produ ... l=da&s=dhs

Not only is this Dell machine slightly cheaper than the iMac, but it's more powerful in every single regard. Got four cores instead of two, twice as much memory, a better graphics card and twice as big a hard drive. And please don't give me the "you're comparing apples to oranges" (No pun intended), I am comparing computers intended for freaking home use. The Mac Pro tower machines are obviously professional workstations!

Apple iMac 20" C2D 1GB 320GB DVDRW £818.97 inc vat

http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx?Qu ... 0000,50336

Sony VAIO LA3 C2D T5600 2GB 320GB £843.99 inc vat

http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx?Qu ... 0000,50417

Apple £818.97 inc vat , sony £843.99 inc vat

so the sony is more, it has more ram admittedly , but to say apples pcs are expensive, you should look at a good comparison.
Dells pcs are cheap because they on the most part don't put a lot of effort into the designs, whereas as sony do and there expensive as apple.
You should see the price of some sony high end laptops....

[allix]

People like that I never bother to try to convert to Linux, for me, it's a giant waste of time. So the issue is moot, from my perspective. If Windows literally "works fine" (And I am REALLY being literal here), then why bother suggesting that people try something else? It's a waste of time in general I find, especially if you have to then spend time educating them on various issues.

what he means by "works fine" is that you can turn on the pc , browse the web and do whatever the person wants and turn it off.
He is not talking about something that's technically better on the kernel level or what has better resources as to the average user , if something runs slow , they upgrade or buy a new computer, its not efficient at all, nor is the throw-away society we have. The fact that you can run linux on lower speced machines is an advantage , however most people don;t care. They just want something that "works fine" and windows does as long as you don't run into problems seriously my two brothers run windows on three machines and they have had no problems , they use firefox instead of ie and all apps they use work fine. I bet for your sister its the same, she can do her homework, play sims and everything is fine.

Now one could argue that this attitude of mine, would prevent meaningful expansion of the Linux userbase into the realm non-technical users. I personally don't believe it does, because there are enough users for whom Windows is a piece of crap, that it's not an issue as far as I am concerned.

I agree with you on that that many windows users this its shit, but because of some application or game, they hang on to windows after all a great os is pretty useless with out the correct applications or games.

If companies like blizzard, adobe supported wine then we could certainly have a good case on our hands.

The freedom argument is not imo going to work because the majority of the people in the world don't give a crap what's happening in Sri Lanka , Zimbabwe , China , North Korea to name a few , so their give less crap about whether software has the four freedoms.

[Tsuroerusu]

Take BackTrack (Security auditing distro), I assume you find it "unacceptable" because they don't include Adobe Acrobat, RealPlayer, Java or what the heck ever.

With the very nature of free software you can make any distro you wish, however we are talking about distros that appeal to the masses ala fedora, ubuntu, opensuse not some niche security distro. You want people to get into linux then the desktop distros should just work.

Do we speak the same language? Because I think it might be more useful if I started speaking Danish, might make a lot more sense. Because I don't see how you can take "Fedora is a Linux-based operating system that showcases the latest in free and open source software." to mean "appeal to the masses", unless you're speaking a different language, I'm just saying.

If on the other hand you don;t care about popularity , ease of use but only freedom then continue using 25 terminal windows with fluxbox and emacs

Idiotic argument my friend, I could give two rats asses about popularity and still care about ease of use if I wanted to. And I happen to find 15 or however many, terminals quite easy to use, in case you wanted to know, so there!

And why the heck can't people not do that with GNU/Linux? If there isn't a package for a particular application for a distribution a person might be using, just don't use that application and find something else! That's what people do in Windows and Mac, I think it's an absurd mentality to think that Linux must be absolutely perfect in every aspect, when the competition certainly are not.

There is a reason why the windows kernel is shit technically, because it has to be backwards compatible. Therefore only msdos software does not work well. With mac , there is a emulator or something for older software.

What the hell does packaging of applications have to freaking do with backwards compatibility? I'll tell you, ZERO!

Oh please, have you ever tried installing Linux on a machine where it generally did not work? I have never seen that!

Debian Stable won;t install on my laptop as the kernel is too old, apart from that I have not had any problems but I am not by any means in front of the latest machines, nor are you to judge what works and what does not. some of your hardware might not work with xp actually, I remember a soundcard from 2000, that I had to hunt down the drivers online, fortunately I did not need to compile anything

Ummm, if I have installed or run GNU/Linux on brand new machines that I built for some other folks, or just tested for the heck of it, am I not in a position to judge?

OK, then what do you suppose we do? Email folks a flyer?

Ideally the hardware comes with the linux drivers on the cd, a asus motherboard I use to have did in fact, its just many manufacturers do not do that.

LOL, NO! Ideally the drivers would be included upstream at kernel.org, so that things just works and doesn't have to be installed or configured in any distribution, and maintained as the kernel changes, this is why you never see an IDE or SATA controller not work. The only reason you'd need to include a driver on a CD would be if the driver was proprietary, and that happens to be a GPL violation!

OK, then explain this to me:

Cheapest iMac: 7.999,00 DKK
2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
1GB memory
ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
250GB hard drive
http://store.apple.com/dk/browse/home/s ... o=MjI4NDk4

Cheapest Dell XPS with a monitor included: 7.690 DKK
Intel® Processor Q6600 Quad Core™ (2.40GHz, 1066Mhz FSB, 8MB cache)
2048 MB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM på 800 MHz [2x1024]
256MB ATI® Radeon® HD 3650 Graphics card
500 GB Seriel ATA/100-harddisk (7.200 omdr./min.) med 16 MB DataBurst™-cache
http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/produ ... l=da&s=dhs

Not only is this Dell machine slightly cheaper than the iMac, but it's more powerful in every single regard. Got four cores instead of two, twice as much memory, a better graphics card and twice as big a hard drive. And please don't give me the "you're comparing apples to oranges" (No pun intended), I am comparing computers intended for freaking home use. The Mac Pro tower machines are obviously professional workstations!

Apple iMac 20" C2D 1GB 320GB DVDRW £818.97 inc vat

http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx?Qu ... 0000,50336

Sony VAIO LA3 C2D T5600 2GB 320GB £843.99 inc vat

http://www.dabs.com/productview.aspx?Qu ... 0000,50417

Apple £818.97 inc vat , sony £843.99 inc vat

so the sony is more, it has more ram admittedly , but to say apples pcs are expensive, you should look at a good comparison.

Please re-read what is quoted above, and come back to me, I compared machines intended for home use, that's a fine comparison. Apple doesn't sell a tower-based machine for home use, so I think it's fully legitimate to compare an iMac to a Dell machine.
In the area of laptops, if a person is gonna buy a laptop for an actual home use (Desktop replacement, is the term for it), they tend to want something with a 15 inch screen (I know my mother certainly would), and if you take the Macbook Pro, that one starts at 13.799,00 DKK here in Denmark, and 1.299,00 GBP (12.240,00 DKK) in the UK, you can quite easily find something with a 15 inch screen, decent specs for a lot less money than what a Macbook Pro costs you. Have a look on this page: http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/produ ... l=da&s=dhs
The one that costs 8.290 DKK, is flipping 5509 DKK cheaper, and yet it has 4 flipping GBs of RAM!!!

Dells pcs are cheap because they on the most part don't put a lot of effort into the designs, whereas as sony do and there expensive as apple.

So flipping what? Your average computer user doesn't buy a computer for it's design (I don't know anybody who would), and aren't we generally talking about average computer users?

You should see the price of some sony high end laptops....

Does average users buy high-end machines? NO!

People like that I never bother to try to convert to Linux, for me, it's a giant waste of time. So the issue is moot, from my perspective. If Windows literally "works fine" (And I am REALLY being literal here), then why bother suggesting that people try something else? It's a waste of time in general I find, especially if you have to then spend time educating them on various issues.

what he means by "works fine" is that you can turn on the pc , browse the web and do whatever the person wants and turn it off.
He is not talking about something that's technically better
...

If you would actually read what I post, rather than just glance over it, you might notice that I understood his reply perfectly, and was referring to the same thing you're trying to tell me that I wasn't referring to.

Please, next time, read before you reply. In other words, RMFP!!!

The freedom argument is not imo going to work because the majority of the people in the world don't give a crap what's happening in Sri Lanka , Zimbabwe , China , North Korea to name a few , so their give less crap about whether software has the four freedoms.

I'd say it depends on who you talk to. A friend of mine who's a hardcore Marxist completely gets it, he got it the first time I explained software freedom to him. Even a politician from the Social Democratic party, whom I talked to during the election, also got the idea, because I told him that investing in the use of free software would keep the money here in Denmark, and not be sent to a greedy company called Microsoft in the USA.

[hellonorman]

I agree with the poster above that this sounded much more like a personal issue of Pat's. I think Pat got pissed off by a couple of comments on some twit network shows and then rationalized an bashing epidemic and a plan to "get back at them".

Again, I like Leo Laporte. I've been a fan since The Screensavers since the ZDTV days. I have nothing personal against him. I do have issue is his TWIT network cohorts bashing on Linux and F/OSS in general. Calling up his radio and asking questions related to Linux is not "to get back at them". I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth. I think we need to raise the awareness of Linux in the mainstream Tech media including syndicated radio shows. These shows reach millions of people. More than any podcast. Leo's show is one of them. Kim Kommando is another. I'm down for calling her show too. The Computer America guys already dedicate one show a month to Linux. Why can't these other shows do something similar? If you don't want to take part in this campaign then don't.

No but going guerrilla, telling lies to the call screener, asking backhanded linux question and generally disrupting his show are.

As I recall Leo did used to talk much more about linux on his KFI show. He also used to do segments about it on the screen savers. You know about 5-10 years ago when it was the year of the linux desktop.

The first and best thing the community can do to raise awareness is accomplish a viable desktop distro. One that doesn't require excuses. If you could Really stick ubuntu on anyones computer such that they didn't lose any functionality then awareness would skyrocket.

[hellonorman]

why bother suggesting that people try something else? It's a waste of time in general I find, especially if you have to then spend time educating them on various issues.

Because linux is supposed to be better, no? And this whole thread is about mainstream awareness. If you don't care about that why are you involved in this thread?

[Tsuroerusu]

why bother suggesting that people try something else? It's a waste of time in general I find, especially if you have to then spend time educating them on various issues.

Because linux is supposed to be better, no?

Well, like you said, "better" isn't necessarily better for everyone.

And this whole thread is about mainstream awareness. If you don't care about that why are you involved in this thread?

Pat basically asked whether he should be honest with the call screener, or lie to the person. So I just gave him my two cents. There isn't more to it, really.

[allix]

What the hell does packaging of applications have to freaking do with backwards compatibility? I'll tell you, ZERO!

well on linux its not always simply just recompiling an application, you have to find the dependencies and quite often those dependences update.
On windows if your just using the standard window gui component, they do not change until a new version of windows is out, so you only have to compile the application and not the dependencies . Makes it a whole lot easier. Package maintainers get pissed of having to track down every dependency update , so some packages just do not get packaged.

Ummm, if I have installed or run GNU/Linux on brand new machines that I built for some other folks, or just tested for the heck of it, am I not in a position to judge?

If I recall, you looked online to see if it worked before you recommended the hardware. The Majority of users just go to a store and pick something, not thinking twice if they is a windows driver for it.

LOL, NO! Ideally the drivers would be included upstream at kernel.org, so that things just works and doesn't have to be installed or configured in any distribution, and maintained as the kernel changes, this is why you never see an IDE or SATA controller not work. The only reason you'd need to include a driver on a CD would be if the driver was proprietary, and that happens to be a GPL violation!

Well the drivers for that Asus motherboard included the source on the same cd, I think it was on the cd because its not in the mainline kernel and not all distros package third party drivers sadly.

Please re-read what is quoted above, and come back to me, I compared machines intended for home use, that's a fine comparison. Apple doesn't sell a tower-based machine for home use, so I think it's fully legitimate to compare an iMac to a Dell machine.
In the area of laptops, if a person is gonna buy a laptop for an actual home use (Desktop replacement, is the term for it), they tend to want something with a 15 inch screen (I know my mother certainly would), and if you take the Macbook Pro, that one starts at 13.799,00 DKK here in Denmark, and 1.299,00 GBP (12.240,00 DKK) in the UK, you can quite easily find something with a 15 inch screen, decent specs for a lot less money than what a Macbook Pro costs you. Have a look on this page: http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/produ ... l=da&s=dhs
The one that costs 8.290 DKK, is flipping 5509 DKK cheaper, and yet it has 4 flipping GBs of RAM!!!

Apple do not sell low-end machines which Dell machines are on the most part. So by that very nature its not a good comparison.
The cheapest Apple is really the start of the high-end,hence I gave a link to a sony pc.
You can buy expensive 15 inch screen laptops that would be a fairer comparison than a low price Acer or Dell.

So flipping what? Your average computer user doesn't buy a computer for it's design (I don't know anybody who would), and aren't we generally talking about average computer users?

It does not cancel that fact that Apple machines by default are designed well, and paying designers is not cheap so Apple have to add that to the price.
And as I said earlier, you have too look at well designed pcs to compare to any Apple.

Does average users buy high-end machines? NO!

If they did not , would they be able to put them on the market?????, you really underestimate the vast amount of laptop users .

[Tsuroerusu]

What the hell does packaging of applications have to freaking do with backwards compatibility? I'll tell you, ZERO!

well on linux its not always simply just recompiling an application, you have to find the dependencies and quite often those dependences update.
On windows if your just using the standard window gui component, they do not change until a new version of windows is out, so you only have to compile the application and not the dependencies . Makes it a whole lot easier. Package maintainers get pissed of having to track down every dependency update , so some packages just do not get packaged.

This has been flamewared over for the past decade, it's inherent in reality, let's just deal with it. Waste of time for you and me to debate it, let the guys who can actually do something to lessen the problem debate this. I am not brushing the argument aside, I just find it to be a giant time-waster.

Ummm, if I have installed or run GNU/Linux on brand new machines that I built for some other folks, or just tested for the heck of it, am I not in a position to judge?

If I recall, you looked online to see if it worked before you recommended the hardware. The Majority of users just go to a store and pick something, not thinking twice if they is a windows driver for it.

Again, will you PLEASE PLEASE read what I wrote!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm starting to get a bit tired of having to rehash and restate stuff all the time.
Notice the "or just tested for the heck of it", that means that I just stick in a LiveCD into a machine I ran into, to see if it worked.

LOL, NO! Ideally the drivers would be included upstream at kernel.org, so that things just works and doesn't have to be installed or configured in any distribution, and maintained as the kernel changes, this is why you never see an IDE or SATA controller not work. The only reason you'd need to include a driver on a CD would be if the driver was proprietary, and that happens to be a GPL violation!

Well the drivers for that Asus motherboard included the source on the same cd, I think it was on the cd because its not in the mainline kernel and not all distros package third party drivers sadly.

What third party drivers? I have seen tons of cases where vendors put old, and outdated driver source code on their CDs or on their website, even though it's in the mainline kernel.

Please re-read what is quoted above, and come back to me, I compared machines intended for home use, that's a fine comparison. Apple doesn't sell a tower-based machine for home use, so I think it's fully legitimate to compare an iMac to a Dell machine.
In the area of laptops, if a person is gonna buy a laptop for an actual home use (Desktop replacement, is the term for it), they tend to want something with a 15 inch screen (I know my mother certainly would), and if you take the Macbook Pro, that one starts at 13.799,00 DKK here in Denmark, and 1.299,00 GBP (12.240,00 DKK) in the UK, you can quite easily find something with a 15 inch screen, decent specs for a lot less money than what a Macbook Pro costs you. Have a look on this page: http://www1.euro.dell.com/content/produ ... l=da&s=dhs
The one that costs 8.290 DKK, is flipping 5509 DKK cheaper, and yet it has 4 flipping GBs of RAM!!!

Apple do not sell low-end machines which Dell machines are on the most part. So by that very nature its not a good comparison.
The cheapest Apple is really the start of the high-end,hence I gave a link to a sony pc.

I have to laugh now, you're saying a quad core machine (Which I gave a link to) is a low-end machine? I went to Dell and found a machine that pretty much matched the Apple machine, spec wise.

You can buy expensive 15 inch screen laptops that would be a fairer comparison than a low price Acer or Dell.

Dell is a fine comparison, if it matches spec-wise, or even surpasses the Apple stuff at a lower price.

So flipping what? Your average computer user doesn't buy a computer for it's design (I don't know anybody who would), and aren't we generally talking about average computer users?

It does not cancel that fact that Apple machines by default are designed well, and paying designers is not cheap so Apple have to add that to the price.

Again, everything comes down in price with mass-production, and you just need to design once and then mass produce. I think your argument is BS.

And as I said earlier, you have too look at well designed pcs to compare to any Apple.

I have yet to see a Dell machine literally fall apart, so they are designed well enough. Again, I just simply disagree with you, and you just aren't gonna convince me here. Not because I don't wanna listen, but I have not agreed with your argument until now, and I doubt I am going to tomorrow.

Does average users buy high-end machines? NO!

If they did not , would they be able to put them on the market?????, you really underestimate the vast amount of laptop users .

Gamers buy high-end machines. And no I don't underestimate people, I run into computer users with laptops all the time, and the only reason the people with new laptops have a bit of a speedy system, is because of Vista's system requirements, nothing else.

[weex]

Not to diverge from this very healthy discussion but I got a response for my email to Leo encouraging Leo to talk about free software. His assistant appeared to have written it though it could have been a clever delayed response....I don't really know. So someone may be reading those emails over there...even if they're just checking a box for a report, it's worth a try and will get a response. So I encourage you all to email away. There are many tech journalists out there who read their own email so may the campaign begin...

[mikeschoon]

Is there any chance of getting Leo on TLLTS, or is he busy, or is everyone of the opinion that it would be nothing more than spin doctoring?

Another thing I was considering was starting an actual call in show for Linux. It's going to take mega hardware and will probably be a logistical nightmare organizing. However, it would pay off as an advocacy project. It's not like tech support hasn't been my life for the past 10 years. Any one have any opinions?

[weex]

Another thing I was considering was starting an actual call in show for Linux. It's going to take mega hardware and will probably be a logistical nightmare organizing. However, it would pay off as an advocacy project. It's not like tech support hasn't been my life for the past 10 years. Any one have any opinions?

Not that I've done it but a call in show probably doesn't take all that much hardware. You might be able to get by with a simple Ekiga.net SIP address though you're setting a certain tech bar since people need to have setup Ekiga. Or you could use the Skype. I would say go for it. Find a way to do it live though...I think that's the great thing about TLLTS. On the west coast at least, we could tolerate a show that starts at 8pm (after TLLTS) on Wednesdays. Might help you pickup some free viewers...

[sngbk]

I'm surprised no one pointed this out yet (and I haven't listened to the most recent tech show yet so I don't know if it was discussed), but Pat got through and asked about home media servers in Linux on the most recent Tech Guy show.

If you skip ahead to the 41 minute mark you'll hear it. Leo never commits to actually recommending Linux but to be fair he did follow up the question after the commercial break with some suggestions from his chat room. He also did point out what is crappy about Windows Home Server.

Did anyone else try to get through or was Pat the only one that day?