Tracy R Reed wrote:
Because Linux has been solid on lots of other hardware for lots fo
people for years.
As has Windows. So? Lots and lots of people use Windows without a
problem for production systems. I see dozens of bugs being patched in
my Linux distro every month, including something like 3 or 4 new kernel
releases since February.
The claim that Linux couldn't possibly have a bug in it that isn't
caused by flakey hardware just seems like a bit of reality distortion.
I'm sure lots of people have had solid Linux experiences. I'm sure lots
have had awful Linux experiences. Just like Windows.
hardware may be broken in the form of chipset and Windows has
workarounds, that seems to happen often also. How much time does this
hardware really spend running Windows vs Linux anyway if you are
dual-booting?
I've been running Windows with maybe 5 crashes since NT 3.51 came out.
I've already racked up twice that with Linux this year, on several
different classes of machines, from rackmount servers to desktops.
I bet you use the hardware for different tasks under each
OS as well.
Errr, wouldn't be much sense in running two OSes if I could do
everything I needed to on one, yes? :-)
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
His kernel fu is strong.
He studied at the Shao Linux Temple.
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
