Phil Waring wrote: > Okay. As luck would have it, LINUX, being very poor, has not the clout > or $ to acquire codes required to run certain hardware. So, who is hurt?
Hardware manufacturers are hurt by losing customers that buy hardware that supports linux. Users that buy hardware that is Windows specific lose because they are locked-in to a vendor, and when they want to move to linux they are held back by their investment in hardware that's not compatible. > Further, representations/documentation made by vendors of code called > generically, linux, has been found to be often incorrect and/or > insufficient. Some, if not all, such vendors irresponsibly offer no > support or recompense, hiding behind legalese "software agreements" or > bankruptcy. Again, who is the loser with respect to the stated > situation? Linux both the kernel and the usual accompanying applications / utilities are largely produced by volunteer programmers and released to the world. Distributions collect these individual projects and try to deliver a workable collection for use. Some vendors like Redhat, Suse, etc do provide support for their versions... for a price. This is the same situation that exists with commercial vendors. > References on linux: Which version? Do such references offer a cookbook > to get included software up and running? Let the buyer beware. Books on linux are out-of-date usually by the time they are published. It's a constantly changing / improving software system. Using linux is an ongoing learning process.
