s. keeling wrote:
Incoming from Andrew Graupe:
Perhaps we could get them interested in the product by showing it fixing
Windows (which is a hard task in anyone's mind) after malware has
rendered it unusable.
That's a valid point.
IMO, this linux eliteism is what is keeping it
That's not. Am I an anti-Windows zealot? No, I'm a pro-Linux
evangelist. Why should I bother to defend in any way an OS that
shoots itself in the head every few months?
You're going to use Linux to resurrect Windows, so it can again shoot
itself in the head. And for this Windows user, this is a good thing?
Shades of Steppenwolf's "The Pusher."
In my probably 6 years of using Windows (since Windows 98), Windows has
only borked itself once. It came at a relatively convenient time, since
I wanted to upgrade to XP anyway. I have had my share of BSOD, but it
always boots back up. I think it would be better if the linux community
took the stance "linux is better because it was programmed to be
reliable and is incredibly stable, not to mention several other things"
instead of "linux is better because MS sucks". MS is not as bad as we
make it out to be, and neither is linux that good. The important thing,
IMO, is that linux is still a *better* operating system.
Regards,
Andrew
--
My computer beat me at chess, I beat it at boxing. We're even.
_______________________________________________
clug-talk mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://clug.ca/mailman/listinfo/clug-talk_clug.ca
