Sandals and ponytail set cramp Linux (ZDNet)

Posted Mar 28, 2006 8:58 UTC (Tue) by jimwelch (guest, #178) [Link]

I am afraid both sides of the coin, show disdain for the other side of the coin.

When I see someone in coat and tie, I ALWAYS think one word first: ENRON and then I calm down and try not to judge someone by their choice of clothing.

Posted Mar 28, 2006 9:01 UTC (Tue) by admorgan (guest, #26575) [Link]

Why do we always need to compete with commercial applications? I use Linux because it works better for me than any other option I currently have (Actually like Plan 9 also, but try to find apps for it). I do not write my open source apps so I can compete with Company X. I write open source apps because:
a) There is not another application that does what I want it to do
b) The other version costs $$$ and I don't feel that I am getting $$$ of value from it
c) I am doing contract work for an publicly funded organization and therefore feel that the public deserves to get the most out of my work.

Those reason are listed in order of descending order of what prompts me to produce open source applications. I also do not use open source applications simply because they are open source, but because of value. I use Linux and have actually paid for a number of applications that run on top of Linux. This is because they performed a valuable service, and the cost I felt was within the value provided. I should mention that open source software does have the advantage of having the built in added value of source availability, but it still all falls under the question of value, not a question of if every commercial software provider needs to be put out of business.

Posted Mar 28, 2006 9:07 UTC (Tue) by NightMonkey (subscriber, #23051) [Link]

All I can say is, "Oh, well." I don't wear sandals, and I haven't had a ponytail since the early nineties. I do occasionally dye my hair. But it shouldn't matter. I think this sentiment that "Open Source" people need to be more "professional" and appealing to business is putting the cart before the horse. Businesses will use what gives them an advantage over their competition, or fail. If Linux gives them an advantage, better businesses will use it. If Windows gives them an advantage, businesses will use that. If it is Solaris... etc. Where's the "inertia"? It is *dizzying* the pace at which businesses are adopting Linux and other Open Source technologies. "Mission Critical" businesses, too.

Perhaps this guy is just jealous that he can't wear sandals and have a ponytail where he worked... :) Open Source succeeds because it emphasizes technical merit and minimizes other concerns (like politics or how often you shine your shoes).

Posted Mar 28, 2006 9:23 UTC (Tue) by rknop (guest, #66) [Link]

Business Savvy : look like a drone. Be assimilated.

I'll skip that one, thanks. Good thing I'm an academic :)

Posted Mar 28, 2006 9:53 UTC (Tue) by jwb (subscriber, #15467) [Link]

Here's a thought. The people who actually work on desktop Linux don't give a flip what Mr. Quinn thinks is "holding them back." People on the outside of the project always seem to believe they have some objective measure of success, but really the only measure of success is this: do the developers think the software resembles what they intended out to create?

It's just like the Linux project as a whole. The natural, and unconscious, objective of Linux is to make a better platform for the development and propogation of Linux. Linux developers just want a better Linux development platform. These days you have professionals from IBM and Fujitsu who have goals other than these, such as making Linux work well for their customers, but that doesn't really change the main point that Linux does what Linux developers want to do, and little else. For a third party non-contributor to come along and say "Linux needs to do this", which happens in the trade press almost every week, is to misunderstand the nature of the project.

Posted Mar 28, 2006 10:01 UTC (Tue) by warthawg (guest, #3055) [Link]

Interesting way to frame the meme. I wonder if they are talking about the same inertia of Linux which has turned the software world completely on its head, and now has MS fumbling the ball so badly even their own are sick of the incompetence, arrogance, and insanity from the top, as they stumble towards the launch of Vista.

Inertia indeed.

Posted Mar 28, 2006 10:31 UTC (Tue) by arcticwolf (guest, #8341) [Link]

When a company (or a representative of a company, but that's essentially the same) cares more about looks than performance (which I'd like to define to also include things like stability, suitability for the task, and so on, not just raw speed), then something's rotten in the state of Denmark - it's a faint whiff of decay that you're catching there, and it's a sure bet that that company has jumped the shark and will - sooner or later - die (this may take a long while, of course, particularly in the case of big companies, but it's ultimately inevitable unless the company undergoes a radical cleansing - something that most companies will not do).

This is a piece of common wisdom that's most often applied when it comes to employees - when a company cares more about what an employee (particularly one who's not in direct contact with customers) wears than about how they perform, the ship's sinking.

But it's also true for other things: when a company cares more about whether the programmers of a software package have ponytails than about how suited the software is to the tasks at hand, the ship's sinking at well. You can still do business with that company, as long as you always demand/get prompt payment, but you should definitely not take this advice - if you listen to this ugly siren's song, you (that is, your project) will be next.

Posted Mar 28, 2006 10:34 UTC (Tue) by etwilson (guest, #8459) [Link]

I hate to break it to this guy but lots of close source software is written by developers with long hair and sandals too. Has he ever been in a software development office? Has he ever met an engineer?

Posted Mar 28, 2006 10:52 UTC (Tue) by bajw (subscriber, #11712) [Link]

I didn't read the ZDNet article, but I wonder if Quinn was talking about the ponytails and sandals at IBM or at HP...

Posted Mar 28, 2006 11:08 UTC (Tue) by allesfresser (subscriber, #216) [Link]

I'm sure IBM would love to send you a nice-smelling, crisply pressed representative of Linux to help you out...

Is IBM not mainstream enough?

This whole article is a big red herring.

Posted Mar 28, 2006 11:22 UTC (Tue) by dwheeler (subscriber, #1216) [Link]

The article Casual Dress Code says: "It is difficult to find a strong argument in favor of non-client-contact personnel being forced to wear formal business attire. The success of companies such as Microsoft, who have casual dress codes, shows that formal dress is not necessary for success."

This blog says "I would encourage you NOT to wear a suit." (when interviewing with MS for a technical job).

Posted Mar 28, 2006 11:24 UTC (Tue) by dokhebi (guest, #14023) [Link]

I've always had "issues" with suits. Their attitude is that "unless you look like us, you can't be professional." This has hampered a lot of potential money making businesses and not just the adoption of OSS.

IBM used to be the leader in this, but sometime in the '90s someone there started to get a clue and know IBM has "Casual Friday" like (most of) the rest of the US. Well, except for this one small company (I don't remember who they are) that has "Tuxedo Friday" where everyone dresses is their finest clothes...

As always, just my $0.02 worth.

Posted Mar 28, 2006 11:33 UTC (Tue) by iabervon (subscriber, #722) [Link]

I have to agree that having your average open source developer show up to a sales presentation isn't going to make a good impression, but I sort of doubt that this is a common problem in practice. I don't think many people in the open source community actually think they're sales people, nor is it something they're likely to try at that level anyway. And there is generally the attitude in the open source community that if people don't use OSS, that's their loss, not ours.

For Linux, there are distributions that provide do sales, and it seems clear to me that this is a major factor for business adoption of Linux. But I don't know of an entity that does slick presentations and cost estimates for migrating a Windows desktop from MS Office to OpenOffice, which is, I think, the transition that Peter Quinn thinks of when he thinks about open source software adoption.

He goes on to imply that it's actually the IT industry that's failing to recognize an opportunity, and it should generate the business savvy itself, rather than expecting the open source community to sell itself.

Posted Mar 28, 2006 12:02 UTC (Tue) by aaron (guest, #282) [Link]

It's a shame that the article's title is so distracting. There are some useful points made, and I suspect a lot of important stuff was edited out of the interview, making it seem vague and disconnected.

His point is not that devs should wear suits, but that OSS needs a professional-looking face, and the IT industry is not providing that. (I thought that was one of the goals of the OSDL, but Stuart can't reach very many people by golfing with them.)

Mind, OSS is already laboring under the disadvantage that it's inexpensive, and therefore obviously inferior [sic]. We're dealing with folks for whom Free means Marketing Gimmick.

BTW, this is the guy who stuck his neck out and proposed that Massachusetts adopt ODF. Anyone know if that smear campaign against him was traced back to some large software company?

Posted Mar 28, 2006 12:05 UTC (Tue) by aaron (guest, #282) [Link]

Jones looks at the button panel. "What's so bad about IT?"

"Please," Freddy says. "Some of them don't even wear suits."

-- From "Company" by Max Barry

Posted Mar 28, 2006 13:29 UTC (Tue) by accensi (guest, #11754) [Link]

One point that seems to be critical is good handling of print copies of emails htmal pages, etc. In enterprise use you do need to use them and normally they are very bad. Probably Linux hackers can survive with the horrible looking, because they do not use, or they can hack a special layout with a2ps.

Try for instance print an email with Kmail or a HTML page with Firefox were you have changed font size. Compare with printing from Outlook or IE. I know very well because I am one of a few using Linux in a 1500 people company.

Posted Mar 28, 2006 16:11 UTC (Tue) by British (guest, #19768) [Link]

lol, should I stop wearing sandles and cut my hair?
But I live in Queensland Australia and it is warm here, I wear a company shirt sometimes though :)

Posted Mar 28, 2006 19:21 UTC (Tue) by ccchips (guest, #3222) [Link]

Some people don't even wear sandals when they code.

But I suppose if there's a coding problem, one might feel a bit cramped, and need to get up for awhile......

I wonder---when personal camera equipment become as ubiquitous as the telephone, will we all be required to wear a suit and tie whenever we sit down at the keyboard to do any work, if we expect to succeed?

Posted Mar 28, 2006 19:25 UTC (Tue) by ronaldcole (guest, #1462) [Link]

"Sandals and Ponytails" co-operate with each other while "Suits" compete with each other. No brainer. Witness the spectacle when one group tries to show the other group the error of it's ways. ;)

Posted Mar 29, 2006 14:59 UTC (Wed) by 0015517 (guest, #2065) [Link]

The article neglects that our overdressed penguin differs from the suits as much as the sandals and ponytails :)