> OK, suppose that the LoC:FP ratio for Linux is 125:1
> and for Windows is 52:1. Is the Linux value better
> than the Windows value? Or if Linux were 32:1 and
> Windows 64:1, would the Linux value be better?
>
> It's disturbing that Linux advocates leap up to proclaim
> its superiority in all things and all ways, even when
> the values in question have absolutely nothing to do
> with quality and there's no way to know if a higher value
> is "better" than a smaller one or vice-versa. It's like
> declaring that Linux is better than Windows because its
> name comes earlier in the alphabet, or that it's better
> than VMS because its command-line prompt character uses
> more pixels.
You know what I like about you two guys, is that both of you stick
rather close to reality, with very little of the usual flaming we see on
other lists. You are both Real Professionals!
> Enthusiastic advocacy is a great and valuable thing, and
> there's a huge amount of good stuff in Linux that compares
> favorably to garbage in Windows. There are also aspects
> of Windows that are superior to the equivalent in Linux.
The number one supremacy of Windows is that it is out there in large
numbers, with a large group of trained users and maintainers who may be
called upon or hired without a lot of difficulty. It is also easier to set
up, even if it does not keep running that long. The availability of
people on the job market with the required skills is The Number One Reason
businesses favor Windows based solutions. It is NOT the support from ms,
it is the availability of people who can do a job using those tools.
> Advocacy that insists that your side is perfect and the
> other side is entirely bad doesn't convince people of
> your opinion, it convinces them that your opinions aren't
> worth listening to.
Linux is not perfect. I have problems with various LAN cards, SVGA
cards, etc. etc. etc. But when it comes time to create custom
applications, it just blows Woodnose away!
I would say that if one wants to create standard applications to run
on a lot of computers, Windows is what to shoot for. The people, tools,
and pre-configured machines are readily available to let your business get
things done. At least, if transient crashes and such on a couple-a-week
basis are not going to cost too much.
If one wants to create custom stuff to run on a few computers, at a
low budget, Linux is the thing to write for. People are somewhat more of a
problem, so if you expect to hire people off the street to do what you are
trying to get done, training costs can be higher. On the other hand, once
you add a UPS to back up your AC power and your modem, losses due to
down time should be much, much smaller.
I run Linux. I like it because of the reliability and the ability to
quickly produce custom solutions. But if my client insists on a business
machine for common use, Windows and some applications program are what I
usually agree to. Even if I would prefer to do it under Linux.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------- IMAGINEERING --------------------------
----------------- Every mouse click, a Vote -------------------
---------- Do they vote For, or Against your pages? -----------
----- What people want: http://www.mall-net.com/se_report/ ----
---------------------------------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Join The Web Consultants Association : Register on our web site Now
Web Consultants Web Site : http://just4u.com/webconsultants
If you lose the instructions All subscription/unsubscribing can be done
directly from our website for all our lists.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
