I just read through some of the comments on the Nexenta review I have up on Linux.com.
There are some fairly clueful comments, and then the inevitable drive-by nitpicks. I sometimes wonder if people only read articles in an attempt to find errors.
I don’t mind a comment pointing out an error. I do mind the comments that go beyond saying “hey, I think you got your fact about XYZ wrong, it’s really this instead” and try to be as insulting as possible. It’s doubly annoying when the drive-by nitpickers complain about something that is, in fact, accurate (or an opinion) and they couldn’t be bothered to either read the article clearly or do some fact-checking themselves.
Case in point, one commenter complained that the article was inaccurate because I said that Nexenta is based on the Ubuntu userland — based on the fact that the Nexenta page is out of date and still says Debian. If you do a little research, you’ll find that Nexenta’s most recent release is using Ubuntu — they just haven’t gotten around to updating the page.
Another commenter complained that I was being unfair on Nexenta’s hardware detection because, apparently, they didn’t understand a fairly straightforward sentence: “I tested Nexenta under VMware and on a Pentium 4 notebook with 1GB RAM, an ATI Radeon R250, Intel sound card, built-in RealTek Ethernet, Intersil Prism wireless, and 60GB hard drive.”
To me, it seems fairly clear from that statement that I tested Nexenta under VMware and on a laptop — not under VMware on a laptop. Two different installs. But two readers saw this as me complaining that Nexenta didn’t see hardware on the laptop when running on VMware. Sheesh.
