On Sat, 2004-12-18 at 02:20 -0800, William Chops Westfield wrote:
> On Dec 17, 2004, at 8:31 PM, Herbert Graf wrote:
> 
> > Of course, you're comparing a case of an OS COMPLETELY supported by the
> > hardware manufacturer to one where the hardware manufacturer provides 
> > NO
> > support. NOT a fair comparison...
> 
> Um.  Wasn't everyone complaining about the poor support microsoft 
> offered
> compared to "the unix community"?  Either microsoft's support is better,
> or it's worse, right?  (no, of course it's NOT right.  Support in 
> different
> areas is ... different.)

We're NOT talking about the OS maker's support, if you had read my
message you would have realized I was talking about HARDWARE maker's
support. Hardware makers have made windows drivers for YEARS. For linux,
nearly nothing (in fact they didn't only refuse to make drivers, most
refused to release ANY info on how their hardware worked, causing a huge
amount of reverse engineering having to take place. Fortunately that is
changing, slowly). 

So a blanket OS comparison just isn't valid since alot of the "problems"
people have had with Linux relate to hardware drivers (not all, but
alot).

> But y'all are painting things with broad brushes.  "Microsoft sucks."
> "Use linux.  Oh.  Not THAT Linux, of course."  etc.

Would you recommend WinME? Most wouldn't. As a similar token, many would
not recommend Redhat in certain versions, for similar reasons. What's
wrong with that? Nobody says Linux is perfect, it has had it's bad
moments, no denying it.

Broad brush? You bet. No reason to get irrational about it.

-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

_______________________________________________
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist