Or"How not to write a review" (not just of antiX, of any distro.

I was messing around on the Internet and came across this and thought it would be good to share.


========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"http://www.arizonatech.net/2012/07/antix-linux-review_1347.html"
linktext was:"http://www.arizonatech.net/2012/07/anti ... _1347.html"
====================================

Well, I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion...even if it is wrong...and stupid.

very TROLLy of him to make those comments, i can't call it a review. lots of attacks without a proof or explication and with so many nuclear weapons, i'm afraid that from the high radiation we will transform in to an ubuntu mutant. the horror!!!

There is nothing of substance in that review at all. He does not like fluxbox, jwm, or icewm, so pretty much based on that, he doesn't want to explore and find out that with antiX, you can easily get whatever you need. Besides, with both the Meta Package Installer AND smxi, plus ready access to synaptic and apt-get as well, what is there to complain about?

The mere fact that the guy cannot figure out how to get Google Chrome running on his system, right there, shows us his almost complete lack of competency, and therefore, he is not a credible reviewer.

I'll have to write one of my own reviews that is much more complementary, and I'll see if I can get a few of my writing friends who are at least likely to be fair, and when they have personal preferences, clearly label them in that manner.

I will see what I can do...

afab4 wrote:Well, I guess everyone is entitled to their own opinion...even if it is wrong...and stupid.

Yes I would agree with this, and if it harms other (by being wrong and stupid) it should try to be enhanced and or corrected.

masinick wrote:There is nothing of substance in that review at all. He does not like fluxbox, jwm, or icewm, so pretty much based on that, he doesn't want to explore and find out that with antiX, you can easily get whatever you need. Besides, with both the Meta Package Installer AND smxi, plus ready access to synaptic and apt-get as well, what is there to complain about?

The mere fact that the guy cannot figure out how to get Google Chrome running on his system, right there, shows us his almost complete lack of competency, and therefore, he is not a credible reviewer.

I agree with this, and it is what had drove me to reply to his blog (I very seldomly reply to blogs). Though from his"About Me" his favorite WM is ICEWM and he does know how to install Google chrome in other distros (antiX was simply to unfamiliar to dig into it). There is not alot more in his reply post to mine, however I hope it is of more credit / somewhat helpful to others that may stumble upon the blog.

masinick wrote:I'll have to write one of my own reviews that is much more complementary, and I'll see if I can get a few of my writing friends who are at least likely to be fair, and when they have personal preferences, clearly label them in that manner.

I will see what I can do...

Thank you, I always enjoy reading your points of view on items (even if I do not reply to them).
Dave

I like it when I read something that shows I am a sharper pencil than some of the reviewers out there.

Keeps my inferiority complex in check. __{{emoticon}}__

there is an update. oh, how i was right about the troll part. i suggest not to pursue the topic, especially dave. you'll waste your time.

Whatever, I tried to read it and the page seems to have disappeared!

dmk