As I enter this post, I find myself not necessarily in the best or worst of moods. Over the weekend I have been getting up at 2 AM, and working until 8 PM in an attempt to get a week’s worth of work accomplished in three days. I actually found myself going on-line seeking distractions just to keep awake. Normally a weekend like this would be nothing particular to write about, if it weren’t for the message which I received. It was from a female acquaintance that I once knew, but never dated. It seems that she was mad at me because there was a rumor being spread about the two of use once having dated. Although I was a little offended that she would be mad over my ever having dated her, I was confused as to what I was supposed to do about the issue since she already knew that it was not I that started the rumor. I guess that she just had to have someone to blame, and to vent her frustration at some type of target? Needless to say that I’m not in a hurry to hear back from her, nor do I intend to send her a Christmas card.
However this reminded me, as well as a recently negative correspondence via another’s blog, just how subjectively people tend to choose their targets. Simply because I use Microsoft Products does not make me an employee of Microsoft. I use Sun’s Products as well, and I have yet to receive a paycheck from them either. I use Novell Products, and still no check in the mail. I use Open-Source, but of course that check will never be forthcoming since the products are free. So even though I am not employed by any company, if I happen to mention the name Microsoft in the wrong crowd, suddenly the comments become somewhat personal towards me. Sadly, the Internet allows people to be openly belligerent with little chance of repercussions, whereas I am an individual who believes in direct confrontation. Because I cannot physically confront the commentors, I have instead had to try to understand their motivation and belligerence.
It is surprising as to just how much we as individuals tend to reveal of ourselves when hidden in the cloak of anonymity. The ability to hide behind a username allows some individuals to act out with malicious intent, such as those who write virus programs. There are those who simply relish in causing emotional distress in others because of something lacking in their own lives, such as the resident rectums located in chat. Then there are those who simply believe that they must enforce their ideals upon others because to them it is the only way. What is surprising is that this type of ideology was previously identified to be found in religious cults. However on the Internet it seems that this type of religious fervor exists where one would least suspect it, the Open-Source Community.
The Open-Source Community is a vast and wonderous land of potential which might one day dictate how mankind collaborates with each other. However that day is not today. While the intent and purpose of Open-Source is to share both ideals and technology, it also harbors a significant minority who tend to believe that their way is the only way to exist. The Open-Source Community consists of a considerable number of technologies and operating systems. There is Tomcat, Mambo, Apache, DotNetNuke, PHP, MySQL, SQL Lite, BSD, and Linux to barely scratch the surface. Microsoft itself has finally begun to post Open-Source Projects at SourceForge.Net. Sun Microsystems already supports Open-Source, and Novell as well with it’s use of Linux. Unfortunately there are still those who will openly express negative remarks towards Microsoft and Windows users. While I cannot speak statistically, my personal experience lists more Linux users as the ones to initiate personal conflicts.
First, let me make this perfectly clear to all who read this post. There is nothing wrong with Linux, or Linux users. I, myself, have RedHat, Mandrake, and SuSE versions of Linux. I would also have OS-X, if Apple was willing to provide me the operating system for my research as so many others have done already. The issue of whether Linux or Windows is better is not relevant to me personally or professionally. The relationship between Linux and SCO matters to me professionally, but has no bearing whatsoever as to the quality of Linux. This post has nothing to do with who or what is better. It has to do with why individuals in the Open-Source Community feel the need to instigate conflicts when by all appearances Open-Source is beginning to win the war against proprietary software?
The reason is psychological. Since I am not a psychologist or psychiatrist, nor have I ever received formal training in either, all my conclusions are based upon personal observations and are meant purely as food for thought.
No matter how analytical we would like to perceive ourselves, our lives are dictated by our psychological profiles. Behavioral psychology provides us with the understanding of why we do what we do when exposed to certain environmental variables. Psychological profiling categorizes the generalized type of personality we appear to possess. If we combine this information and apply it to those who rely upon computers, we should find that the use of a computer and a username only seems to allow submissive traits to become more dominant due to the perception of remaining anonymous.
When Linux was first developed, based upon Unix, it was indeed considerably more stable and reliable than the existing version of Microsoft Windows at that time. Because of this many unhappy Windows users adopted not only the Linux operating system, but openly voiced that they had found a better platform. Today the overall differences between Linux and Windows is considerably less than in the beginning. However the war between the users of the two platforms has not changed.
What is rather interesting about this war between the users of the platforms is that there are those among the new recruits who have no idea as to why they are actually fighting. Over the past two years I have had open discussions with students who have proclaimed Linux to be a better platform. Of the students located in my area, the majority of the ones willing to allow me to examine their systems were still running Windows ME or XP Home. Regardless as to what they were actually using, all began their praise of Linux due to the number of crashes or freezes they experienced. Out of the number of students, only a handful were not using brand name systems, and very few were savvy enough to actually install and run Linux. When actually asked to list the steps required to maintain any computer system; i.e. file and partition verification, defragmentation, virus checking, less than ten percent could answer correctly. So the choice of Linux was actually not based upon any technical knowledge, but on what the user had read or heard via the Internet.
The resulting information was profoundly interesting in that it displayed that decisions were not being made based upon common sense or logic, but upon irresponsibility. The students wanted perfect running systems, but did not want to perform maintenance. The students who drove said that they did know and expect that maintenance was required on their cars. They also said that they would not fly if the planes were not properly maintained. And yet they expected their computers to maintain themselves. It is possible to automate most maintenance tasks, but the majority of the students failed to ever take the time to use the Help files, tutorials, or even on-line resources or web sites. The end result is that even if the fault in their system’s performance was due to their neglect, they believed that the blame lay with Microsoft because that is what they had heard or read on the Internet.
The question as to which is the better product is irrelevant in this post. What is relevant is the need for people to place blame on someone else for their own improprieties. No matter what operating system you are running, it is not the operating system’s responsibility to maintain itself. The same is true of the Internet. Daily people whine and cry about SPAM, and yet the majority has failed to band together to demand that their ISP’s deal with the situation, and the ISP’s are not openly co-operating to restrict SPAM. So if the operating system is not to blame for a number of the complaints, who is?
The majority of system errors are not caused by hardware or software failure, but by operator ignorance. However as human beings we tend to not want to accept the responsibility for our actions when the results are disasterous. Instead we feel the need to place blame on the provider. If the economy suffers, it is the government’s fault. If a relationship fails, it was the other person’s fault. If the computer crashes, it was the developer of the operating system, or the manufacturer of the system who was at fault. No matter what the circumstance, it can never be our fault.
As a result of this typical psychological behavior there exists a public conflict between users of different brands of computers, and different operating systems. Even if one brand and one operating system was proven to be better than all the others, there would still be a war. It is not a question of fact, but of personal perspective and objectivity. There are the personality types which are weak by themselves and angry, but need to be surrounded by others to feel strong. There are those who are weak both alone or in a crowd, and simply accept whatever is placed before them. There are those who are strong as long as they have others who follow. There are those who refuse to conform to any group mentality. Then there are those who are capable of independence, but can just as equally work within a group. What this all resolves to is that even in the use of computer technology the majority of users are being dictated by their emotions instead of by their intellect. Surprisingly enough, this is even true the more technically knowledgeable the user. Unfortunately marketing strategists are already aware of this fact, and as such play to these emotions in the hopes of generating sales.
So although it seems as if everyone in business is aware of these facts, the computer users tend to appear ignorant of this information. The fact that there are debates over J2EE and .NET, Linux and Windows, Apple and an X86, simply shows that very few are aware of the truth. The truth is that there is no one product or one technology which does it all. The choice should be based solely upon the individual or business needs, and not upon the hype. However in order to admit this to one’s self would mean the willingness to accept a certain amount of self-responsibility. And just how many of us want to admit to ourselves that we are more emotional than we think, or that our decisions are colored by our perspectives and not necessarily the facts? The most profound question of all, which I doubt will be answered in my lifetime, is with all the available choices to pick from, why is their a need for some of us to argue or dispute?
I wonder just how many of us, if we truly took a good hard look at ourselves, would be willing to admit that we are controlled by our emotions and behavior instead of the other way around?