3 ms·
Well it is LWN which has a history of crappy reporting. It's like reading an East German newspaper in the 1980s.
by meaty 14y ago
Well it is LWN which has a history of crappy reporting. It's like reading an East German newspaper in the 1980s.
- 4ad 14y agoYeah, LWN is pretty bad, I wonder why does it have so much appeal?
- hendi_ 14y agoHonestly, I don't understand your and the parent's comment. I really, really like LWN and appreciate what it does for the Linux and broader FOSS community. In my opinion LWN doesn't only shine when compared to some crappy "linux news pages" coughphoronixcough but also when compared to higher-quality, "traditional" media. I'm really interested in hearing of sites that others assert a high quality to. Would you please care to elaborate which sites you prefer instead of LWN?
- koide 14y agoLWN is, rather obviously, (highly) Linux biased. The people there tend to make mistakes when talking about other operating systems. I guess that's what those comments are about.
- doesnt_know 14y agoI think I'm with Hendi on this one, I'm not a heavy reader of LWM but I check it every now and then and go through stories I think may interest me. Overall, I would say it has some fairly decent writing but if you have alternatives you think are better I would very much like to know about them.
- cmccabe 14y agoLWN has appeal because it has actual original content, often written by some of the people who work on the Linux kernel and related projects. It's not just a link aggregator (although it is that too.) It's also a place where discussions are mostly polite. If you don't like the article, maybe you should mention what you didn't like about it. I thought it was pretty even-handed. It even ends with a plea by Corbet to avoid a Linux monoculture-- not something you might expect out of the editor of Linux weekly news.