> One of the favorite arguments of the free software and open source
> community for the obvious superiority of such software over
> proprietary alternatives is the user's supposed ability to take
> control and modify inadequate software to suit their wishes.
> Expectedly, the argument has been often repeated in relation to OLPC.
>
> I can't possibly be the only one seeing that the emperor has no
> clothes.
>
> I started using Linux in '95, before most of today's Internet-using
> general public knew there existed an OS outside of Windows. It took a
> week to configure X to work with my graphics card, and I learned
> serious programming because I later needed to add support for a SCSI
> hard drive that wasn't recognized properly. (Not knowing that C and
> kernel hacking are supposed to be "hard", I kept at it for three
> months until I learned enough to write a patch that works.) I've been
> primarily a UNIX user since then, alternating between Debian, FreeBSD
> and later Ubuntu, and recently co-writing a best-selling Linux book.
>
> About eight months ago, when I caught myself fighting yet another
> battle with suspend/resume on my Linux-running laptop, I got so
> furious that I went to the nearest Apple store and bought a MacBook.
> After 12 years of almost exclusive use of free software, I switched
> to Mac OS X. And you know, shitty power management and many other
> hassles aren't Linux's fault. The fault lies with needlessly
> secretive vendors not releasing documentation that would make it
> possible for Linux to play well with their hardware. But until the
> day comes when hardware vendors and free software developers find
> themselves holding hands and spontaneously bursting into one giant
> orgiastic Kumbaya, that's the world we live in. So in the meantime, I
> switched to OS X and find it to be an overwhelmingly more enjoyable
> computing experience. I still have my free software UNIX shell, my
> free software programming language, my free software ports system, my
> free software editor, and I run a bunch of free software Linux
> virtual machines. The vast, near-total majority of computer users
> aren't programmers. Of the programmers, a vast, near-total majority
> don't dare in the Land o' Kernel tread. As one of the people who
> actually can hack my kernel to suit, I find that I don't miss the
> ability in the least. There, I said it. Hang me for treason.
>
> My theory is that technical people, especially when younger, get a
> particular thrill out of dicking around with their software. Much
> like case modders, these folks see it as a badge of honor that they
> spent countless hours compiling and configuring their software to
> oblivion. Hey, I was there too. And the older I get, the more I want
> things to work out of the box. Ubuntu is getting better at delivering
> that experience for novice users. Serious power users seem to find
> that OS X is unrivaled at it.
>
> I used to think that there was something wrong with me for thinking
> this. Then I started looking at the mail headers on mailing lists
> where I hang out, curious about what other folks I respect were
> using. It looks like most of the luminaries in the security
> community, one of the most hardcore technical communities on the
> planet, use OS X.
>
> And lest you think this is some kind of Apple-paid rant, I'll mention
> Mitch Bradley. Have you read the story of Mel, the "real" programmer?
> Mitch is that guy, in 2008. Firmware superhacker, author of the IEEE
> Open Firmware standard, wrote the firmware that Sun shipped on its
> machines for a good couple of decades, and in general one of the few
> people I've ever had the pleasure of working with whose technical
> competence so inordinately exceeds mine that I feel I wouldn't even
> know how to start catching up. Mitch's primary laptop runs Windows.