My objection is that the article is not Linux specific. The same program can probably be installed easily on OS X or FreeBSD.
"The Joy of people who make their software available" would be a more appropriate title.
TFA boils down to: "I was emailed a proprietary format for an application that doesn't exist on my platform. I was able to find and install a third-party utility to convert it to something usable."
An astonishing tale of Linux superiority it's not, but I wouldn't say they jumped through hoops or spent hours researching anything here.
> [..] we managed to do something that is
> absolutely trivial for everybody else [...]
Would this be free & scriptable on Windows? It's been a while since I had to do anything comparable on Win, but I think he would have had to buy MS Office (Pro?) with VB or Visual C++ to do it.
Or, one would google for 10 seconds like I just did and find for example http://timothychenallen.blogspot.com/2007/08/vb-convert-any-... which does that for you and converts the file into a csv file, and then process it like other csv files. No Office or Visual Basic required.
So his claim 'this would have taken a couple of hours' (about converting the mdb to csv on Windows) is a load of bollocks and FUD. He didn't even search for it I'd wager, and let his ideologically myopic view cloud his pragmatic judgement. I'm not sure why people are defending this sort of juvenile fanboyism, it's drivel like this that makes the rest of us serious users who propose Linux in situations where it actually is better than the alternatives look like nutcases.
Now, you can still open mdb files on Windows, using the Jet Engine and something like ADO, ADO.net or ODBC, but the details of that are a bit too gory for the mild mannered command line junkies here.
Of course, maybe the source of the data was wrong in choosing mdb as the format, and a csv would have sufficed. I don't know, that's not the point here. The point is that mdb is the easiest way to get 'database-like' information that is more complex that just a flat list of records into the hands of 'regular' users, as much as that may dismay those for whose platforms nobody has written software to open them.
For that to work with sqlite databases, one still needs to install a GUI tool first, hope that it associates the right extension with the sqlite file you have, and then get over the database-centric user interface that all of them have.
Look, I'm not saying that mdb is better than sqlite. But I am saying that the notion that the 'openness' of sqlite somehow makes it easier for regular users to open them is a crock.
Or maybe we can talk about if using sqlite databases in simple, 'script-like' applications is easier than doing the same with mdb/Access databases. That is more nuanced and depends on what environment you want to talk from etc. But that goes far beyond the definition of a 'user' as in the use case of the OP (a large student body to whom exam results need to be communicated).
because, of course, time is free.
Let's face it, this 'article' was utter fanboyism, and does not exhibit any form of proof that Linux is better than whatever.
(I've run Linux since 1998 and I do prefer it for some tasks, like server tasks. I have many years of experience and am well aware of its strengths and weaknesses. Interoperability with the files that 'regular' computer users use is not one of those strengths).
I recollect a similar situation when I volunteered for a Linux fest. (http://wiki.sampada.net/GNU_Linux_Install_Fest) The venue could only accommodate 50 odd people but > 300 had registered on the eve. We needed to update all that after 10:30 am seats may be full and we might not be able to accommodate all, at 10 pm.
Me and another friend of mine wrote a simple script to fetch mobile numbers of registrants, and another silly one to use gnokii and send an SMS to the fetched numbers. (http://wiki.gnokii.org/index.php/User%27s_Guide#SMS_Sending_...)
Linux is fun.
Have you ever tried to get infrared data connections to work on Linux? I have, and I can tell you that it takes many, many times longer on Linux just to figure out how it should work (in my case, infinitely longer, since I never did get it to work).
I'm not here to say that one is better than the other, just that the examples here do not prove one or the other, or not even give a hint in the direction. They're all completely trivial things that can be done by a competent user on any OS.
May be one could even interpret it like 'there are a lot of software vendors who force their users into proprietary solutions and formats but with Linux at hand, limitations could be worked around to get things done'.
Perspective, isn't it?
Look, there are two situations in the example in the OP:
- 1. User has 'regular' Windows PC with Office. User downloads file from website, double-clicks file, is on his merry way.
- 2. User has Linux PC and an ideological axe to grind so doesn't want to use anything else. User needs to hunt internet for software, turns out not be be so easy, spends hours and finds intense satisfaction in accomplishing something that is considered trivial by other people. User then proceeds to write blog post proclaiming, totally and utterly non sequitur, superiority of Linux because he managed to accomplish said trivial task.
The only 'limitation' here is a self-imposed one - the guy refuses to use anything but Linux to convert his data on. That's like saying 'I ran a marathon with a rope of 30 cm tied between my ankles'. Impressive (in a certain way), sure - but why? Why not just run the more efficient way like everybody else, with no rope?
If you're going to defend your OS by cherry-picking tasks that are somehow easier or more elegantly done by it, go ahead - the internet is full of them, but hey what do I care, everybody is free to do whatever they want in this regard. But this 'example' doesn't make any sense and confirms the general notion that Linux is for people who like technology for technology's sake and revel in finding convoluted, over-engineered solutions to the most menial tasks. And in that sense, it affects us normal people who just want to get stuff done too, because it causes a negative image for Linux, rather than what I'm sure the author thought would be a positive one; hindering its uptake in contexts where it is superior or appropriate.
I'm not saying this guy single-handedly destroyed Linux, I'm just really desperate with seeing this toxic single-mindedness still being so pervasive, after all those years.
And I think "Linux IS great!" articles at this day and age are pretty much unnecessary - this battle has been fought (rather) long ago.