On Fri, 2005-05-27 at 21:59 -0400, Chad Smith wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > From the customer's POV there's another reason, and that is choice. > > Modularity means that you can move modules around. For example, in > > Windows there is only one graphical interface. In Linux there is > > Gnome, KDE, Afterstep, Sawfish, Englihtenment, Icewm, Blackfox, fvwm > > and a dozen others. > > That's not true. Windows has many GUIs. There is LiteStep, 3DNA, > Window Blinds, just to name a few... > > There is plenty of choice in MS Windows. > > In fact, there is a **** load *MORE* choice in Windows than there is > Linux. A billion times as many programs and much more functionality.
Here we go again... He said choice of Window managers, not GUI cosmetics or general applications programs. Given the different timescales of availability its very unsuprising that there are more applications programs for Windows. At the fundamental programming levels Linux is much more diverse in the possibilites of using alternative code for different aspects. The kernel itself is pretty big and some people eg Hurd kernel project believe that too would be better to be more modularised. However that would run into the same compatibility problems of anything new, so even if better it might not catch on. -- Ian Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ZMSL
