I Hate Open Source Software - Why Open Source Sucks

[WaRmNfUzZy]

http://www.grumpynerd.com/

I Hate Open Source Software - Why Open Source Sucks
Written by Grumpy Nerd on January 19th, 2011
Listen here you fucking dorks I already know what
you?re going to say ?Well Grumpy Nerd if you hate
open source software so much then why do you have a
Wordpress blog that is running on an open source
database?? Because Wordpress is a very rare example
of open source software that doesn?t suck which
doesn?t remotely make up for the other 99.99993% of
open source software that sucks like a coked up
Hoover.


Open Source Is A Fraud

There are two types of open source projects: The
first type is the software built by womanless losers
on SourceForge who have so much fucking free time in
their lives that they can take hours out of their
day to contribute to some worthless open source
project that like everything else in their pathetic
lives they won?t complete. They won?t document it.
They won?t fix the legions of bugs that they built
into the software. They will just fade away leaving
their code-turd forever stinking up the digital
domain.

The second type of open source project is maybe even
more insidious than the first. It?s the corporate
open source project. This is the project which is
directed by, funded by and whom all of the
contributors are employed by large corporations.
It?s open source to better their market position or
to encourage the use of their services. I?m fine
with that. I?m a lover of capitalism. What disgusts
me are you doe-eyed open source hippies that swallow
the bullshit they are feeding you. You naive losers
are being bamboozled by your corporate masters
because you don?t understand how marketing works.
They are contributing to the open source ?movement?
not to make the world a better place or set software
free or build a code utopia or whatever nonsense you
believe they are doing it to gain consulting
services market share, raise brand awareness or the
sell their proprietary solutions that complement the
?free ones.?


Linux Sucks

That?s right I just called out the crown jewel of
the open source movement. Linux is great if you?re
building a super-computing cluster, you run a web
hosting company with 3,000 servers or you?re
Facebook/Yahoo/Google and you need something very
custom and very rare. Linux is pretty nice if you?re
deploying an embedded system application. But for
the 99.7% of us that are using computers for common
everyday tasks Linux is a wholesale disaster. On the
server side it requires much more maintenance and
more knowledge and effort to deploy and maintain
than it?s commercial counterparts.

?Well Grumpy Nerd maybe you?re just not smart enough
for Linux??

No douchebag I am actually much smarter than you and
I have shit to do and don?t have time to patch
kernels and search for device drivers. It also means
that I understand the value of time and I?d rather
pay a few hundred bucks for an operating system
license that patches itself and has device drivers
available out of the box because my time is
valuable.


?But Grumpy Nerd Linux is more efficient than
Windows and it runs great on my 15 year old POS 486
with 4K of memory??

I?m sorry that you can?t afford a new computer that
will run a decent modern OS. Maybe if you were more
talented you could sell your code for money and
wouldn?t have to give it away for free. BTW Windows
7 runs awesome on this four core i560 machine with
an assload of RAM. Too bad you?re stuck in the
mesozoic era of computing.


?Grumpy Nerd Linux can do anything Windows can do
and is gaining desktop market share??

No it can?t and No it isn?t. That is the circle jerk
of lies that you Linux nerds tell each other to make
yourselves feel better. Outside of your dork circles

Linux has zero desktop market share. No one uses it.
The reason they don?t use it has nothing to do with
Microsoft and Apple being mean. Or Microsoft cutting
deals with computer makers. Nope. People don?t use
Linux on the desktop because Linux on the desktop
sucks. It?s hard to use. The GUIs are all ugly and
clunky. Most importantly there are no useful desktop
software packages that runs on Linux. Open Office is
the drooling learning disabled little brother of
Microsoft Office. Everything that Open Office does
Microsoft Office does better. Photoshop is better
than GIMP. For business productivity try to find an
accounting package, shipping system or great suite
of design tools that run on Linux. They don?t exist.
Aside from web surfing and nerd circle jerk parties
Linux on the desktop is useless.


Incomplete Documentation

Open Source nerds don?t have the discipline to write
documentation because it?s no fun. Writing new code
is fun. Fixing bugs in old code is less fun. Writing
documentation sucks. Which is why most open source
software is buggy and features little to no
documentation making it useless to everyone outside
of the authors.


Open Source Is Fad Driven


Most computer nerds have the attention span of a
teenage girl off her Adderall. The next shiny object
that passes though your periphery will distract you.
Remember Ruby back in 2006? (Or just Rails if you?re
a cool dork) oh you couldn?t turn a corner without
some douche-canoe evangelizing the wonders of this
horrible little fad framework and how it was going
to revolutionize delivering software and services to
the web and like the Segway Scooter of computer
science? BAM in 2011 no one uses it. In fact the
only people that still use Ruby on Rails are the
loud mouthed idiots that painted themselves so far
into a public corner evangelizing this brain dead
framework that they can?t possibly backtrack without
exposing themselves as the frauds that they are.


No Fucking Support

In my best open source Hippie voice; ?you don?t get
it maaaan the community supports you in the open
source movement.? Oh really? You mean I?m supposed
to bet my job on the trouble ticket turnaround time
of the four crusty nerds hanging out on Source Forge
who are going to tell me to RTFM to which there is
no fucking manual because no one got around to
writing one. That?s the support that you want me to
rely on? Or do you mean the paid support from the
many corporate open source contributors who sell
their consulting services for more than licence cost
of the commercial product they are replacing with
?free? software? Thus simultaneously costing me
more and wasting more of my time? Thats your
support?


Open Source Wastes Time

Open source software is for people that have more
time than money. An open source solution is usually
a patchwork of mutually incompatible systems jury
rigged together into a semi-workable solution.
Finding how to assemble these random components into
a working system takes time and effort. (Time is a
cost just as money is a cost) ?Ahh so I have a MySQL
4 database I?m not sure which connector I should use
so I?ll get the latest then I?ll write some code??
then when I test it I find that the latest
connectors only support the most recent version of
MySQL and I have to find an older build of the
connector but that version is full of bugs because
no one tested it before they released it (which
explains why there were 93 releases last year one
per fucking bug apparently) and half the shit that
is supposed to work doesn?t (why would anyone need
parameterized queries - just strcat a line of
dynamic SQL together you pussy) so I have to re-code
for bug avoidance purposes. After a few tries
you?ll successfully dodge all of the non-functional
features and you?ll cruft something together that
functions (most of the time).
OR! I could skip all of that hassle and develop the
whole thing in ASP.NET where the database was
designed specifically to work with the web framework
that was designed to work with the language that was
designed to work with my development environment and
it was all designed to run on my desktop OS which is
BTW is similar to my deployment server OS and get
the job done with zero hassle and in 1/3rd of the
time. Oh but I?m an idiot because I paid a few
hundred bucks for software! Microsoft really fucked
me didn?t they?


To Summarize The Shitpile that is Open Source

99.99993% of open source software is complete
garbage. Most open source developers suck otherwise
they would be getting paid to write code. The open
source developers that don?t suck work for Oracle,
IBM and Red Hat and are contributing to open source
projects so their employers can collectively gain
market share on Microsoft (isn?t working) and trap
suckers into using their open source solutions so
that the suckers will buy their consulting services
and support contracts. And Wordpress doesn?t suck
but MySQL which Wordpress uses to store it?s data
does suck. And thats all you need to know about
open source.

Grumpy Nerd Out.

[vallor]

On 11/24/2014 12:11 PM, WaRmNfUzZy wrote:
>
> http://www.grumpynerd.com/
>
> I Hate Open Source Software - Why Open Source Sucks
> Written by Grumpy Nerd on January 19th, 2011
> Listen here you fucking dorks I already know what
> you?re going to say ?Well Grumpy Nerd if you hate
> open source software so much then why do you have a
> Wordpress blog that is running on an open source
> database?? Because Wordpress is a very rare example
> of open source software that doesn?t suck which
> doesn?t remotely make up for the other 99.99993% of
> open source software that sucks like a coked up
> Hoover.

Nice self-nuke there -- and he knows it, because he tries
(ineffectually) to justify it.

Skimming his crap, he makes some claims that just turn out not to be the
case.

In short, some kid writes up a flamey troll, and you fall for it HLS?
That's pretty funny.

--
-v

[JEDIDIAH]

On 2014-11-24, vallor <val...@cultnix.org> wrote:
> On 11/24/2014 12:11 PM, WaRmNfUzZy wrote:
>>
>> http://www.grumpynerd.com/
>>
>> I Hate Open Source Software - Why Open Source Sucks
>> Written by Grumpy Nerd on January 19th, 2011

What is it with trolls and moldy oldies these days?

Don't they know that it's nearly 2015?

[deletia]

Hell. Y38 is almost upon us!

--
Apple: Because only pirates are power users. |||
/ | \

[flatfish+++]

That's a fairly accurate representation of Linux, Open Source and the
Open Source community.

It's interesting how some things never seem to change.

They should be swarming the nest shortly in an attempt to discredit
what you have written. That's a sure sign that you've struck a nerve.

If the Linux GNULoos spent as much time improving their miserable
operating system as they spend in denial, Linux might actually have a
chance at unseating Microsoft.

They never will though. Because it's much easier to place blame for
Linux's failures on something other than Linux and the Linux
community.

I'm getting out the popcorn!

--
flatfish+++

Linux: The Operating System That Put The City Of Munich Out Of
Business.
Before Switching To Linux Read This:
http://linuxfonts.narod.ru/why.linux.is.not.ready.for.the.desktop.current.html

[Peter Köhlmann]

WaRmNfUzZy wrote:

>
> http://www.grumpynerd.com/
>
> I Hate Open Source Software - Why Open Source Sucks

Idiot

[flatfish+++]

Yes you are, Peter Kohlmann.

The article is pretty much spot on and you know it.

[Sir Slimer]

+1,000

--
Sir Slimer
OpenMedia Supporter
www.silverlips.ca

[Sir Slimer]

You forgot to post a message, we can only see your signature... and you
forgot to put the -- before it.

[Snit]

On 11/24/14, 6:08 PM, in article m50kpg$m30$3...@dont-email.me, "Sir Slimer"

<slvrslmr@lv.c> wrote:

> On 24/11/2014 6:00 PM, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>> WaRmNfUzZy wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> http://www.grumpynerd.com/
>>>
>>> I Hate Open Source Software - Why Open Source Sucks
>>
>> Idiot
>
> You forgot to post a message, we can only see your signature... and you
> forgot to put the -- before it.

Well, given the accuracy of his signature it is not surprising he screws it
up so often. :)


--
* Mint MATE Trash, Panel, Menu: <http://youtu.be/C0y74FIf7uE>
* Mint KDE bugs or Easter eggs? <http://youtu.be/CU-whJQvtfA>
* Mint KDE working with folders: <http://youtu.be/7C9nvniOoE0>
* Mint KDE creating files: <http://youtu.be/N7-fZJaJUv8>
* Mint KDE help: <http://youtu.be/3ikizUd3sa8>
* Mint KDE general navigation: <http://youtu.be/t9y14yZtQuI>
* Mavericks / Pages 5.1: <http://youtu.be/D3BPWANQoIk>
* OS / Word Processor Comparison: <http://youtu.be/w6Qcl-w7s5c>

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

Shall we tut-tut the warm-n-fuzzy grumpy nerd for confusing Open Source with
Free Software?

<http://springfieldpc.dyndns.org/shimmie/_images/7d2dd009748f6a983079c5664fb7c966/3111%20-%20batman%20gnu%20linux%20plus%20richard_stallman%20rms%20robin%20stallman.jpg>

--
Not exactly as shown.

[flatfish+++]

Is that from Mad Magazine?

[Sir Slimer]

Whether you like it or not, the only difference between free software
and the open-source kind is generally in the license. At the end of the
day, the source is available and the software is shared freely from one
place to another regardless of whether it is modified.

[John Gohde]

On Monday, November 24, 2014 3:11:49 PM UTC-5, WaRmNfUzZy wrote:
> http://www.grumpynerd.com/
>
> I Hate Open Source Software - Why Open Source Sucks
> Written by Grumpy Nerd on January 19th, 2011

No YOU suck!

[Steve Carroll]

Yet you still back Snit with his claims of admitting to his mistakes. Which of these has he admitted to?

Here's are but a few of your many, many mistakes. Can you spot the ones you've 'admitted' to having made?


"Keep in mind virtual desktops pre-date X-Windows (they were seen on Xerox machines in the 1970s)." - Snit
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/E4P17zHoZ18/GpTamPCG0RMJ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_desktop
--

Regarding the issue of lateral position shifting of centered web-pages where some pages are longer than others (thus creating a scrollbar):
"Can you find a website that is centered that does *not* do that, assuming some pages scroll and some do not. LOL!" - Snit

When confronted, you tossed this red herring:
"Steve also has *no* idea what the purpose of the site is nor why it has or lacks any feature..."

Fact: The "purpose" of a site has *nothing* to do with your erroneous statement.

Notice you then tried to cover your error the 'Snit' way:
"That is what Google does on their home page. It is fairly common." - Snit
It was "fairly common"... *after* he researched it ;)
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/DLF7F-jiGl0/5r8zo0ZRUAMJ
--

On EXIF data":
"EXIF data is the date of the image, Tim, not the date of the download." - Snit
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/w9pWSa90DrI/qCc2GP2sCoAJ
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exchangeable_image_file_format
--

On set theory (and sex):
"Items in a set need not contain all the items in any given subset within that set."
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/sN1HvpwXrKw/7nrGK5fKuwIJ

When 'owl' tried to defend the above as a "typo" (a typo?!), I pointed out this wasn't an isolated incident. When asked how you were using the word, you gave the following definition for the word "sex":

sex n
1. either of the two reproductive categories, male or female, of animals and plants
2. sexual intercourse
3. sexual activity or behavior leading to it
4. the genitals (literary)
5. the set of characteristics that determine whether the reproductive role of an animal or plant is male or female

And you issued the following statement:
"Sex is a subset of sexual activities" - Snit - (I guess he didn't comprehend point 3 very well)

Yet, you also parroted the definition you produced:
"Sexual activities are sex by definition, you moron" - Snit

Then there's this tidbit, which contradicts the now famous point 3 of your definition:
"A passionate kiss could be called a "sexual activity" but it is not sex."

In Snit world, a passionate kiss is not sex... but it is sex. How the f*ck does that work? Another "typo"? Oh well, anyone can see that you're obviously very confused about set theory, let's just hope you never combine it with sex again, the result could be detrimental to society.

"I do not see any *logical* reason to disallow incest" - Snit (Really? Not a single reason? Wow...).
--

On the MacBook Air:
"Apple is pushing how green this is - but it is clearly disposable... when the battery dies you can pretty much just throw it away." - Snit

When confronted over this enough (it took awhile), you eventually admitted you were merely parroting an argument you'd read in an online article, at least, that's the claim that you figured would let your stupidity off the hook. That you believed the claim enough to parrot it is supposed to be forgotten by the reader ;)
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!original/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/feSyFVVDV50/0BJSoL4jYhMJ
--

With a "friend" (and being deceptive about your Masters degree):

Your "friend" wrote:
"He can't afford that much. The guy can barely affordable to feed himself, much less a house that he isn't completely embarrassed by. The reality is that Snit has no education. He's a liar and a parasite." - Silver Slimer
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/lujLIc3TH3g/1YO956whU3EJ

Regarding your Masters degree, from the same thread:
"Keep in mind I have never lied about my level of education (if I had you would quote it). Heck, Carroll named a University and claimed I said that is where my degree is from... but he just flat out made up that." - Snit

Fact: Nothing was "made up", you said Kaplan was where your "Masters in IT" was "from":
"I have a degree in Psychology from UNLV and a Masters in IT from Kaplan University."
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/e0A4xSg5LTA/Hy0QBcuuLsUJ
--

On assessing war criminality:
"He has lied about the war on Iraq. An illegal war. One that makes him a war criminal." - Snit

A week later:
"Right: I can not unequivocally state that Bush is a war criminal." - Snit

The following week:
"Bush is a war criminal". - Snit

And:
"Ok... Morally he is a war criminal. Legally, it has not been decided." - Snit

Geez, Snit! He either is or he isn't. I'm curious what 'morals' you're using to make that last statement. Are they based upon "religion"?! Say it ain't so!

Lots of fun can be found in this thread:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.sys.mac.advocacy/n08mkd9Vu0E/m4njQg0byasJ
--

On digital telecommunications:
When on a journey to "prove" another of his ridiculous COLA episodes Snit creates a thread that begins with:

"OK, I hate to admit this, but the Skype is done and *I* screwed up the recoding..."
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/VDp3Wm8Kt9E/w4lQbBtnpyQJ
--

On KHTML licensing:

"Webkit is licensed under the GPL. Apple used KHTML as a starting point... and it was licensed under the GPL.

But by all means, Peter, explain why you are more of an expert about the license of WebKit than the license shown at webkit.org.

LOL!" - Snit
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.os.linux.advocacy/RPgY6uyISz0/533S4hx19LEJ

License: GNU Lesser General Public License (aka LGPL)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KHTML
--

On the creation of trend lines:

When Snit went outside of COLA for "support" for his argument, a poster sensibly responded with:

"I gather there are two questions here:

1) Is the trendline approriately fitted to that data?

2) Is the trendline useful in some way?"

In your usual non-sensical fashion, you replied:

"Not quite: the question was merely if the process of creating the trend line was correct..." - Snit
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/comp.soft-sys.sas/XFMX5rRiIt4/IXlUpjxiSTIJ

I wonder if you'd care to explain how point 1 can be ignored if there is a concern for accuracy. I'm thinking you never did find your trend line very "useful" after this.
--

I could fill volumes with this stuff ;)

[Henrique Matos]

Well Grumpy Nerd, I couldn't agree with you more.