Are hardware vendors starting to bail on FreeBSD ... ?

[Greg Barniskis]

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Danial Thom" <danial_thom at yahoo.com>
> To: "Greg Barniskis" <nalists at scls.lib.wi.us>; "Nick Withers"
> <nick at nickwithers.com>
> Cc: <jerrymc at clunix.cl.msu.edu>; <danial_thom at yahoo.com>;
> <freebsd-questions at freebsd.org>
> Sent: Thursday, July 13, 2006 11:10 AM
> Subject: Re: Are hardware vendors starting to bail on FreeBSD ... ?
> 
> 
>> Burying your head in the sand is a common method
>> used by stupid people that have no answer to the
>> truth. I don't blame you; you guys don't want
>> your employers to know that you've wasted man
>> 1000s of their dollars because you don't know the
>> performance characteristics of the hardware
>> you've recommended. It must be thoroughly
>> embarrassing.
[snip]

> I do agree with Danial that most USERS on this list are
> burying their heads in the sand on this issue.  But I will
> point out that there isn't really any reason they shouldn't
> be.  What the market wants is features, not speed.  And
> that is what the FreeBSD developers are working on.

Features over speed is generally the right equation, yes.

But I think you're being too generous to Danial. The quote of his 
above was in direct response to my assertion that many people refuse 
to listen to him because he frequently engages in cheap demagogy[1].

His response? Another whole boatload of cheap demagogy, questioning 
the intelligence, aptitude and moral character of anyone who doesn't 
listen to him, by way of accusations that are wholly unsupported by 
facts. I could probably rest my case right there, but I think his 
perception (and yours) that people are not receptive to claims of 
FreeBSD performance problems is quite simply false.

Every time a performance question is brought up, I see a flurry of 
calls for clarification and for the formulation of repeatable tests 
which are generally agreed to be an accurate gauge of the problem. 
People with performance problems then /sometimes/ get upset (I think 
because the questioning and testing tends to assume they're wrong 
and they get defensive about it).

The problem is, scientific testing of an assertion must try to prove 
the hypothesis is false, and must posit (and also try to disprove) 
any plausible alternative explanations. There's just no reason to 
get upset about that. Raising questions about a claim, and trying to 
explain an outcome's root cause by alternative hypotheses, is in 
fact the /required behavior/ of critical thinkers.

When the OP of a performance problem does follow through with 
testing, and is willing to engage civilly in a logical debate, then 
generally there is a successful outcome to the thread. When the OP 
of a problem gets emotional about it and starts spouting cheap 
demagogy, then other users and developers quickly will walk away 
from the table.

Walking away from trollery is in no way equivalent to these users 
and developers sticking their heads in the sand on the issue. It's 
the predictable response of critical thinkers who recognize demagogy 
as a tool of /antitruth/. Those who consistently use demagogy are 
always more interested in winning an argument than in finding the 
truth, and any critical thinker either sees right through the murk 
of BS being tossed at them or least has enough intuitive sense to 
recoil from it.

And that is /the only reason/ why people ignore Danial. His brand of 
cheap demagogy is so potent that the smell of /antitruth/ emanates 
from his posts in a field so strong that it might as well be a 
physically repelling force. He might do better in politics or 
religion where these trollish "debating" tactics are the norm. But 
in a community of critical thinkers, the "truthiness" of demagogy 
will rarely find any traction at all.


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demagogy