I throw down the gauntlet to the "real" geeks.

[spirilis]

Originally Posted by Xander

Is there a secret? Is there a shortcut or is the twelve year route a necessity?

It's 12 years of practice (and seeing Linux through all kinds of driver/obscure hardware/library issues/app developers at work doing crazy shit/watching Linux crash & burn under heavy load) , yeah.

A couple hints though:
1. Working knowledge of the C programming language (Standard C, not C++ or C# or Java or anything higher-level like that; Standard C where you have to deal with pointers and no object-orientation). This gives you access to the "language" that all the intimate details of Linux's core speaks. Oh, it also helps to have knowledge of the BSD Sockets interface, which all network-aware apps use to initiate/manage any communication involving networks.
2. Good knowledge of shell scripting
3. Master of the shell prompt, in general.

I don't think it's possible for a good Linux technician to troubleshoot a system without busting out a shell prompt.

[Little Linguist]

I have a mac. I guess that means I'm a total loser as that was not even on the list.

[sassafrassquatch]

Windows XP power user. I know how to write basic HTML, Vista is an abortion, Windows 7 will be as crappy as Vista and Linux is an attempt to reinvent the wheel by autistic marxists (real men use Unix),

[spirilis]

Originally Posted by sassafrassquatch

Linux is an attempt to reinvent the wheel by autistic marxists (real men use Unix),

that's the best thing I've read all day.

[Athenian200]

I use Linux on some of my computers, and Windows on others.

I like configuring Linux and figuring out all the different things you have to do to make it work, for some reason. I'm not a programmer, but I do know how to edit configuration files, have a knowledge of how Linux is organized, how to apply patches, and even fix syntax errors or change pathnames in .h and .cpp files. I'm not sure, but I think I'm about as good with computers on the software side as you can get without actually programming them or specializing in any one thing. I can even use things like "grep," to some extent.

I'm not quite a real geek, but I'm almost there.

[Xander]

Originally Posted by Little Linguist

I have a mac. I guess that means I'm a total loser as that was not even on the list.

You are evil it's true but you can post yourself under the Linux lot for this purpose. It's all the same really

(waits for distant explosion.....)

Originally Posted by sassafrassquatch

Windows XP power user. I know how to write basic HTML, Vista is an abortion, Windows 7 will be as crappy as Vista and Linux is an attempt to reinvent the wheel by autistic marxists (real men use Unix),

Vista is actually a good idea or two... it's just propogated with lots of terrible ideas and really bad final install management!

If you took the core mechanics of Vista without any of the "hey we can do this" I think it'd make a first step to a really good OS. The problem is the whole closed source. M$ finds you "customising" too much, you know like making it work well and stuff, and they'll sue. Can't have people prooving it can be done or worse still having a look at the direct X stuff so linux can have that too!!!

I do agree though, Linux has that Russian kind of cold war atmosphere to it... ie the technology is good but the interface sucks!

[Xander]

Originally Posted by spirilis

It's 12 years of practice (and seeing Linux through all kinds of driver/obscure hardware/library issues/app developers at work doing crazy shit/watching Linux crash & burn under heavy load) , yeah.

A couple hints though:
1. Working knowledge of the C programming language (Standard C, not C++ or C# or Java or anything higher-level like that; Standard C where you have to deal with pointers and no object-orientation). This gives you access to the "language" that all the intimate details of Linux's core speaks. Oh, it also helps to have knowledge of the BSD Sockets interface, which all network-aware apps use to initiate/manage any communication involving networks.
2. Good knowledge of shell scripting
3. Master of the shell prompt, in general.

I don't think it's possible for a good Linux technician to troubleshoot a system without busting out a shell prompt.

That's the problem then. I'm on lowly Visual Basic and such. I expect words that mean something... totally weird like that

The scripting thing is what throws me everytime. Is it just me or are they just avoiding the word programming incase it scares people off?

[Xander]

Originally Posted by Athenian200

I use Linux on some of my computers, and Windows on others.

I like configuring Linux and figuring out all the different things you have to do to make it work, for some reason. I'm not a programmer, but I do know how to edit configuration files, have a knowledge of how Linux is organized, how to apply patches, and even fix syntax errors or change pathnames in .h and .cpp files. I'm not sure, but I think I'm about as good with computers on the software side as you can get without actually programming them or specializing in any one thing.

And the beard?

How's that coming along?

[Athenian200]

Originally Posted by Xander

And the beard?

How's that coming along?

If it's any consolation, I'm not as into Linux now that I know how most of it works and have done most of the things I wanted to know I could do in it... and now mostly use Windows again, simply for the applications available. I just happen to use it still.

[sassafrassquatch]

Originally Posted by Xander

Vista is actually a good idea or two... it's just propogated with lots of terrible ideas and really bad final install management!

If you took the core mechanics of Vista without any of the "hey we can do this" I think it'd make a first step to a really good OS. The problem is the whole closed source. M$ finds you "customising" too much, you know like making it work well and stuff, and they'll sue. Can't have people prooving it can be done or worse still having a look at the direct X stuff so linux can have that too!!!

Vista seems to be perfectly fine under the hood I just hate what MS has done to the interface. I don't like having it rendered by the GPU, Windows Classic in Vista looks like ass, the menu bar belongs above the tool bar and the tool bar is now static and unchangeable. The Control Panel is completely disorganized and requires more clicks to do things than in XP. Aero looks like foggy plastic rather than glass and Segoe UI is illegible to my eyes, Tahoma or MS Sans Serif is ideal. The new icons are very pretty though.

I do agree though, Linux has that Russian kind of cold war atmosphere to it... ie the technology is good but the interface sucks!

I kind of like the way KDE, Gnome, X11 and the other window managers look, my beef is more with the silly Open Source ideology and it's irrational hatred of commercial software. The best open source application available is Firefox and its code base is derived from Netscape which was commercially developed. I pirate Windows, MS Office and Photoshop so I could give a shit if my programs are "free as in speech."