As a long-time Linux user and, as I like to think, advocate, I am continually surprised at the way many Linux users "advocate" Linux. It seems to me that the most effective (or, at least, the most professional) way to extoll the virtues of a system is to point out its technical merits, not to trash a competing system and then say "see, next to that, my system is way better."
Unfortunately, my opinion does not seem to be shared by a sizeable and vocal portion of the Linux community.
While it is true that many of Linux's commercial "competitors" use underhanded tactics such as FUD to downplay its benefits or cast vague aspersions upon perceived weaknesses in the system (usually the Open Source development model or the lack of a unified corporate figurehead), they do not resort to personal attacks on individuals of the Linux community or the handful of companies that make Linux or Open Source software their business.
Some Linux users do, however, make personal attacks on individuals (Bill Gates in particular) or corporations (Microsoft). I am sure that many people have very good reasons to dislike the Microsoft Corporation, the blanket hatred and Microsoft bashing that I see day after day on Linux sites and in the context of Linux is unprofessional and nonproductive.
In a recent article on Slashdot detailing a request from Microsoft for the public review of the security of a Microsoft Windows 2000 server, I was disappointed to see literally hundreds of comments saying things like "This is Microsoft propaganda, if you find cracks don't tell MS and wait until W2K is released!", or "Don't help MS debug their W2K system", or merely the unfounded "This is FUD". Microsoft's intentions for this project might not have been entirely altruistic, but we have no reason to believe anything but that Microsoft wanted to debug Windows 2000 and release a superior product. Surely this is a goal that the Open Source community can stomach; while it's not exactly showing the source code, at least it is some form of peer review. Of the stacks upon stacks of comments about this (enough to put Slashdot into "overload mode"), only a small percentage were useful information. Even less gave Microsoft the benefit of the doubt.
Knee-jerk Microsoft bashing such as seen in the threads under that article buys us nothing; for those that agree it is "preaching to the choir", and for those that do not it is hardly a convincing argument. Unfounded "Microsoft Sucks"-type statements do little more than make people think that Linux users are juvenile and unaware of the "real" issues of the software world.
The "message" I am trying to send, if you will: Help advocate Linux by dwelling upon its strong points, not by trashing the competition. Everyone will be happy this way: The Linux advocates will be received in a better light, and those being advocated to (I know, that's a horrible phrase) won't feel like they're being bludgeoned or patronized.
So the next time you want to post a "me too" MS-bashing article, or the next time you tell someone "Linux roolz, the other stuff droolz", take some time out and consider whether you're helping anyone. A few loud and irrational diatribes can destroy dozens of well-thought-out messages that patiently extoll the very real virtues of Linux.
Maybe this article won't help anything, but I feel better. Please direct any comments to me, but withold the flames. Constructive criticism welcome. Thanks for reading!