On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 16:24:39 -0700 "Monique Y. Herman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Linux is a kernel. I can almost guarantee that you've never, for > example, discussed an implementation bug with a microsoft or apple > kernel developer. > > The gripe is about "linux" as though all of the thousands of > applications that happen to run on linux are part of it. But the > reality is, they are separate projects. One app may have great > documentation; another may not. Would you blame microsoft because some > random application you bought from compusa had poor documentation? You must be aware, surely, that there are two usages of 'Linux'. One is the one you have given, which is the original meaning. But there is also the general evolved man-or-woman-in-the-street usage that applies to the distribution as a whole. Of the two magazines in my local newsagent's shop that have 'Linux' in the title, neither deals exclusively with the kernel, and kernel-specific content is probably only a smallish proportion of the total. Does 'Debian Linux' only refer to the Debian version of the kernel? It is this second sense that was relevant to to the discussion about the consumer. - Richard. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
