On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Sacha V. Chua wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 12, 2002 at 02:24:52PM +0800, Michael Balcos wrote:
>
> > 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?
>
> Depending on the performance of OS A, of course. ;) I've seen a fair bit
> of alpha software that performs remarkably better than certain
> released software... Very weird.
Err... I should have rather described OS A as unstable alpha software. If
open source OS A was indeed unstable and inefficient, people will still
pay for
software from Darth Gates. You wouldn't run a clunky OS for mission
critical purposes.
As for Linux, stating the open source philosophy is the
fundamental step for a "FREE" OS. But if it failed in taking the leap
towards functionality and reliability, it wouldn't be considered
seriously by many. I really think Linux is a feat not merely by being
"FREE" but also by being able to deliver. I think of it as idealism
("FREE"; open source) translated into reality (delivery).
_
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]
