[WEB4LIB] Re: Little of GNU/Linux in Libraries (was: The beginning of the end for the

[Raymond Wood]

>> Mr. Goerwitz pointed out that most libraries have not adopted Open
>> Source software (and in particular the GNU/Linux system) and was
>> a bit scathing of them for this, even if he did not wish to sound
>> that way.

> <SNIP!>
> 
> Sorry if this is a little late. I've been out of the office for a few days!
> 
> Anyhow, we use BOTH WinNT and Linux here at YVRLS. The Linux release
> is Debian and our IT head is a master of it. 

Congratulations - Debian is a superior GNU/Linux distribution <running
and ducking>  :)

> I have got to agree all
> the way with Mr. Goerwitz if he was scathing towards libraries for not
> adopting open source technology. 

As do I.

> From our standpoint, Linux gives us
> far fewer problems than any of our NT machines. 

In my experience, NT and GNU/Linux are not even in the same class, when
judged from the criterion of stability.  The whole notion that NT is
anywhere even close to the Unices is nothing more than a tribute to MS's
marketing department - it pure PR, not based on empirical evidence.  For
an instructive, and amusing, look at Unix vs. NT, see:
  http://www.unix-vs-nt.org

> Whenever we upgrade
> something on a Linux server, it usually goes fairly well with the
> normal tweaking and adjusting one comes to expect from Linux upgrades.
> But the point is this, at least we know where to look for tweaks and
> adjustments with Linux. Windows, in common MS style, tends to hide
> these features from the common user and sometimes even the Netadmin.

GNU/Linux tends to be based largely on regular ASCII text files, the
kind you can just edit with an ordinary text editor (like vi or
notepad).  This, in addition to the source code being freely available,
makes the system as accessible and open to tweaking as it gets.

> > The simple truth is, until we get alternatives to Windows client
> > programs, we are stuck with Windows.  

I am curious as to what kinds of software applications you are thinking
of here.  Windows still has more applications available in general, but
there are a *lot* of apps available for GNU/Linux now, and the
application landscape is changing very quickly.

> > I use GNU/Linux myself
> > (Slackware 7.0 with additions), but I can not go to my boss and say
> > that we should change the machines in our lab, and loose half of the
> > functionality on them.  

Nor would that necessarily be appropriate.  I tend to argue for a
'hybrid solution' these days, since no one wants to throw out the baby
with the bath water.  Windows and GNU/Linux can inter-operate on the
same network.

The point is that anyone who supports, directly or indirectly, a
*monoculture* such as Windows-only servers/desktops is doing a
disservice to themselves, their employer, and their clients IMHO.  There
are many reasons for this, but I won't launch into them here.

Suffice it to say that a sensible, and eminently do-able, strategic goal
for libraries everywhere would be to move away from a Windows-only
environment to one that accomodates both Windows and Open-Source/Free
Software solutions.  Librarians should educate themselves as to the
disadvantages of monopoly/monoculture, in all its aspects, and endeavour
to foster a more pluralistic computing environment.  Again there are
many positive reasons for going this route.

> > As for Librarians being apathetic or reactionary to IT, it comes
> > more from unfamiliarity then from fear or loathing.  

Well, it also comes from laziness, apathy, and indifference IMO,
unfortunately.

> > IT
> > rarely tries to help librarians understand, and most of the
> > time is because of a lack of time/resources, than of un-
> > willingness.

Developing customer-driven solutions does take time and energy, but it
is certainly worth doing.  Instead of simply taking the expedient status
quo route, librarians would do better to evaluate their IT decisions on
a long-term basis.  

> In my experience librarians are very interested in what IT is
> doing if for no other reason than what IT is doing directly effects
> what librarians are going to do. But since most librarians aren't
> computer scientists and even fewer are telecommunications and
> networking techs they just simply do not understand why IT does some
> of the things that it does.

One does not have to be a computer scientist or networking guru to
educate oneself about the basic issues.  Personally, I have learned
everything I know about computers pretty much on my own.  Even if one
has no desire, inclination, or aptitude to become a geek/techie, one can
still read and research enough (librarians are supposed to be good at
these things, are we not?) to understand the importance of the Free
Software and Open Source landscape, and then realize the possibilities
and opportunities they offer us in our roles as librarians, especially
as technology becomes more and more pervasive within our discipline.

Raymond