Rob,
Here is my original comment. This is not to restart the debate; just to
show bob what he missed:
"...I love GNU/Linux; and I've been using it since 1995. Not only do I
love GNU/Linux; but I am one of the few that refuses to run any other
distro than Slackware. There is no other OS that can come close to
GNU/Linux in terms of reliability, scalability, security (and believe or
not, ease of use)...As a desktop (or even a netbook), on the other hand,
GNU/Linux simply BLOWS...and SUCKS..."
Robert Lewko wrote:
Now I have to weigh in on the conversation.
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 7:16 AM, Juan Alberto Cirez <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dan,
I've used Slakware on the desktop for several years without any
'major' issues (i.e running into a problem for which I could not
find a solution). Granted one has to roll up one's sleeves and
'get dirty'; but the result is just the same (I guess I could be
described as one of these 'people who live to tinker or [a]
control freak'). The whole challenge thing was part of a greater
argument we had a couple of days ago and was not based on my own
personal experience.
Cheers,
Now you are defending Linux (especially Slackware, which as Dan says
has superior alternatives) on the desktop!!! I thought that you said
it Sucked!!! DUDE you can't have it both ways!!!
BTW. What I have been sitting back silently saying to myself is "its
not like windows is free of hardware hassles". What about the older
hardware that does not provide Vista drivers? What about the reported
driver hassles with sucky drivers for Vista (I can't claim to have
experienced this first hand; I'm not dumb enough to trry to run
Vista). What about when manufacturers that will start dropping
support for XP shortly. Will that then qualify these for being a
Sucky Desktop OS?
When I install Windows, like I need to do every once in a while
(flight sim that does not run under wine), I have to install graphics
drivers and the right driver has to be installed from the specific
directory on the driver CD. I had to find this out from a tech at
Memory Express. Maybe that qualifies XP as a sucky desktop OS (well
it does, but for much more serious crimes than that).
What I said in my previous post was that there is a whole populace
that don't have any understanding of any OS at the conceptual level.
That means that when they encounter ANY differences, they are stuck.
That even means differences like the ones going from one version of
Word to the next. So when confronted with another OS they are
panicked. This panic is softened by the perception of others around
that are there to help.
That is why MS has such a lock-in. It has zero to do with its
suitability as a "desktop OS". That is why Linux with ANY desktop
will be at a disadvantage!!! That applies to any other OS for that
matter.
--
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Juan Alberto Cirez
CFAA/CFAT, AFSA/CFAT-CFET,CIPS/ISP, ASTTBC/CFET, CHI(e)
Sr. Field Service Technician/Project Manager
J. A. Cirez Integrated Technologies, Inc
Fire Protection | IT Services | Security | Home Inspections | Consulting
Tel. : (780)972-4739
Fax : (780)747-6078
Email: [email protected]
Web : http://www.jacintech.com
=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
_______________________________________________
clug-talk mailing list
[email protected]
http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
Mailing List Guidelines (http://clug.ca/ml_guidelines.php)
**Please remove these lines when replying
