Stuart, First off. Don't think I ever have been to support.m$.com don't think they have anything I'd ever want. Since I only use M$ for it's proper use, to play games, why would I care about support. Any REAL work I want to do is done under some flavor of Unix.
As oon as someone gets CoD running under Linux, I'll go back to a single boot system. Denis On Thu, 1 Jul 2004, Stuart Fox (DSL AK) wrote: > > > > > > Paul, > > > > If I'm understanding you correctly you don't understand > > Linux/Redhat. Or your just being silly to make a point. > > sendmail, wftp , php, etc.. are not owned by Redhat. Each of > > these applications are owned buy someone else and Redhat is > > allowed to re-distribute them. > > Yeah, but Redhat are the vendor, whether or not they actually wrote the > software, they distributed it to you. Their product is Redhat Linux > (the distribution), if that has a flaw in it they shouldn't get exempted > just because they didn't write it. Could Microsoft then pass off > support for ftp.exe for instance? > > > > > And using the number of fixes/patches to an application as an > > indication of how god it is, is a bad thing. Using this logic > > you would have to say M$ is a good product. > > I believe you haven't looked at http://support.microsoft.com for a > while? > > And besides, it was pretty clear that he wasn't using it as an > indication of relative quality, just as an indicator of the fact that > noone writes perfect software. > > _______________________________________________ > Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. > Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html > _______________________________________________ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.netsys.com/full-disclosure-charter.html
