Shawn Walker wrote: > More important than giving users fully working hardware out of the > box? That doesn't seem reasonable. Users don't care about "open > source," they care about supported, working hardware.
Many users care about both. > If the "open" option is fully functional and supported, sure, it can > be used in place of the other. But as long as there is a better, > redistributable option, that's the one we should be using to give the > user the best experience possible "out-of-the-box." Ok, but then you're handing a key differentiator to Linux, and people will tell each other that OpenSolaris is irrelevant because it's not really open. ? Donal _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
