It's still an unfair comparison. With a binary distro. you only need to upgrade packages if you need specific things like you are talking about. I can install Mandrake in say half an hour (including upgrading packages), then maybe 10 min. to configure things in the GUI, great now I can spend my time downloading my favorite programs and trying out new ones. With Windows it would take say half an hour to install, then an hour to load in my vendor specific drivers, 2-3 hours to upgrade everything and then I finally get to install Mozilla and whatever else I want. If your going to make a comparison make a fair comparison. You cannot give a handicap in a comparison. That would be like letting one car start first in a car race because you know it's slower. Then it wouldn't be a race anymore. Most of the time there is no reason to upgrade Samba, the Kernel, etc. I don't care if my version of Samba is a few revisions old. It does want I want it to, and it's been tested. Also the only reason that you wouldn't be doing the same thing in Windows, is because MS doesn't come out with upgrades as fast as the OSS world does. How do you think that a system that was built in 2000 is more current than a system build 3 months ago?
Jesse Quoting Kevin Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Because the time even out. > > With Source based, you compile it on the fly, and it takes a while. > With Binary based, you DL a new version, then install over the old one. > > I just think that by installing current right off the bat, you avoid so > many > other issues, that the additional time spent compiling doesn't matter. As > another of my messages message showed, you'll end up compiling lots of > extra packages manually even if you use a binary based distro. > > Kev. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jesse Kline" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Monday, December 02, 2002 11:11 AM > Subject: Re: (clug-talk) Linux Work > > > > Kevin, > > > > It occurs to me that you keep saying that compile time is irrelevent. > Yet > this > > discussion is based on your comparison of the time it takes to install > Linux vs. > > Windows. If you are talking about install times, then how is compile time > not > > relevent when you need to compile Gentoo in order to install it? Also, > how > can > > you sit there and say that comparing the time it takes to install a > binary > OS > > vs. a source OS is a good comparison? That is a completely rediculous > > comparison. I'm not trying to bash Gentoo by saying that Red Hat is > better > or > > anything (I've never even used Gentoo), I'm just saying that comparing > Red > > Hat/SuSE/Debian/Mandrake, or any binary OS install to Windows is a fair > > comparison, unless you are building Windows from source. > > > > Jesse > > > > > > > > > >
