> > "Let's face it: getting support for Windows is much easier than
> > getting
> > support for Linux. That's because there are a few things militating
> > against
> > the development of a useful Linux support network.
> > The first is that Linux is a derivative of Unix, a true programmer's
> > paradise. Unix has long been the domain which you enter by walking
> > beneath
> > banners that say 'Normal humans need not apply' and 'User-friendliness
> > is
> > for wimps'. A lot of this attitude has rolled over into the Linux
> > community.
> > It expresses itself in newsgroups where flaming is a matter of course,
> > anyone who can't phrase a question in hexadecimal is torn to bits, and
> > medals are awarded for answers couched in the most cryptic terms
> > possible."
It is easy to get support for Windows. You call the tech support and
wait on hold for hours on end. THEN you get to talk to somebody who
really doesn't care about your problem, and probably don't know how to
solve it anyway. To you tech support people out there, I know, your job
sucks, you don't have to tell me heh heh.
Aside from that...
My experience with the 2 lists I subscribe to (KDE and Mandrake) people
are more than willing to help. And you get anwsers that are to the
point and correct most of the time. And unlike the Windows support, on
the Linux lists (well, on the KDE list) you can get help from the
developers themselves.
Another example, a few months ago I was trying to compile and install
Ksnuffle so I could have a nice easy to use sniffer program. When I
went to compile it, gcc 2.95 did what it does best and ate itself on a
change from char * to const char *. I e-mailed the developer and 2
weeks later he gave me a place where I could download the sources that
were fixed for use with gcc 2.95. Somehow I doubt that Microsoft would
be so helpful... :-)
Dan
