On Fri, 11 Jan 2002, Orlando Andico wrote:
> You SEE? how BLIND you all are!
>
> Linux is not better because it's less of a CPU or memory hog. It's not
> better because it's a better multiuser OS. It's not better because it's
> technically superior (arguable), or because it's more secure. Or it has
> more features. Or it costs less. Or it has less TCO. Or it's more "l33t."
>
> Linux is better because it's FREE.
>
> But then lots of people live in Singapore and reportedly enjoy it there..
True, the open source philosophy does give it a plus. In fact, I think it
is the bottom line for saying Linux is a good alternative. But being
merely "FREE" will not make it a good alternative. It has to prove to the
world that it is capable(here comes the issues like stability and
functionality). If, for instance, OS A is presently freely available w/
source code but is alpha software, and here is Windows XP, what would you
choose between the two?
_
Philippine Linux Users Group. Web site and archives at http://plug.linux.org.ph
To leave: send "unsubscribe" in the body to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe to the Linux Newbies' List: send "subscribe" in the body to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
