Posted on 12/22/2006 7:42:08 PM PST by Swordmaker
If the comparison in LOC between the linux distro and a windows OS is an invalid comparison (one is the kernel and a gazillion programs and the other is just the OS), then why make said comparison at all? The comparison is either valid or it's not.
Secondly I'm reading/posting this on a Fedora Core system - have a windows/linux machine that sit side by side at home - I use a KVM switch to toggle between them. Inevitably I find I'm toggled to linux as it is just more of a pleasure to use. It just works, is all. I can be root or user just according to which xterm I work from. With windows you have to log off your session and log back in. Windows, takes a "vacation" from time to time and nothing works for a while and then it comes back. Never happens with linux.
Well, I can tell you that I work for a pretty big ($5B) company, and I guarantee you that they won't let anything with Vista on it to connect to the corporate network for at least 2 years. We were running Windows 2000 until maybe 2 years ago. And we just got upgraded to Office 2003 last month. This isn't because the company is behind the times, it's because the IT department won't deploy new software until it's been thouroughly tested.
Yup.
Pretty much can bet the farm that if it's a Windows computer owned and operated by a non-techie type, it's totally bloated and infested.
I hear it over and over... "Why is my computer running so slow??..."
Answer: cause it ain't your computer anymore. You are now an email server sending porn to the Philippines..
Like I said, Gates and company wanted to make computers so even idiots can use them.
And they succeeded.
Kind of like having a cousin in the IRS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.