I apologize for launching that flame about Windows NT Magazine. I
reasoned that "violent rhetoric" was necessary to not just explain my
outrage, but to express it. That was an error of judgement on my
part -- especially, since the Linux advocacy mini-HOWTO has specific
instructions on just this situation:
http://www.datasync.com/~rogerspl/Advocacy-HOWTO.html
So I will dial back my zeal, and remain a civil Linux advocate.
Further, it was unfair of me to paint Dr. Russinovich with the same
brush as Craig Barth -- their articles were in the same magazine, and
that is where the association ends. Dr. Russinovich certainly can't
be held accountable for Mr. Barth's article, nor can he be held
accountable for the editorial policies of the magazine.
I do still have concerns about the editorial review at the magazine.
Specifically: I wish the fact checking in the Linux (or indeed, UNIX)
articles enjoyed the same care that the magazine's editors take with
NT -- in other words, the same care from which NT Magazine has justly
earned the trust of their readers.
However, I can also understand how that can be difficult, especially
for an OS that has just appeared on the magazine's radar screens --
their expertise will naturally be better with NT than Linux or UNIX.
Finally, I'd like to suggest that a magazine could employ
their web site for rapid updates to their readers, including errata.
That can only improve the magazine's stature, and offers a way to
offset the delays from reception of errata to print publication.
Thank you, and Happy Holidays!
-Scott
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/