So what your saying is anyone who praises M$ is a M$ spy????
(climbs up soap box)
Sorry to burst your bubble...but M$ still does alot of things better than any
'nix does. Consider the uses of D3D, DVD, USB and many other devices that M$
directly supports NOW...it is mostly in ALPHA or BETA right now for ALL
'nix's. Linux is catching up...probably about another year or so of
development, and Linux can/will rival M$ for a larger market share of OS's.
But until then, I notice ALOT of people sending to this list that want/need
DUAL boot to an M$ version, or people saying they are not at their Linux box.
So if M$ is SOOOOOOOOOO bad...why do people that swear by Linux, and swear AT
M$ continue using it for things like browsing, DVD, USB, printing graphics,
any game that requires Direct X ( which is ALOT of the popular titles), many
high end programs that have no equivalent in any 'nix language.
Now before everyone gets out their flame throwers...I praise Linux to alot of
people that want something different...Mandrake in particular for it's
install, and XWindow/KDE GUI. But I also work in a computer store and
see/talk too many people everyday that have problems with M$ ( _all_
versions). I know M$ has been lagging with NEW code, but I guess Uncle Bill
just wants the almighty $$.
I am not now, nor ever have been an M$ employee.
(ducks the flaming M$ coaster, and falls off his soap box:))
my $0.02 worth...:)
Jaguar
Phil Cziao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> saaayyyy....
> yours and mark sheppard's responses wouldn't have anything to do with 'road
runner'
> (that rr.com email address) being a business affiliate of microsoft, would
it?
> i mean, you do realize if that is why then this constitutes as spam?
> and you do realize what it says about spamming on this list?
> you can check it out here:
> http://www.linux-mandrake.com/en/flists.php3
> in the meantime, give us a break. everyone knows that if the boys from
redmond
> would open up their kernel source, everyone's programs would work a lot
better. you
> can't blame NS.
>
> ~p
>
>
> Anthony Huereca wrote:
>
> > IE may crash every once in a while, but it's a whole whole lot stabilier
than
> > Linux's Netscape. That thing crashes about once a hour, whereas IE might
crash
> > once a day at most. Sure, it doesn't bring down the whole system when
Netscape
> > crashes, but it is an annoyance and sometimes after it crashes, I get
repeated
> > errors about bookmarks being reloaded or something like that, which is
also
> > really annoying. I'd take IE over Netscape anyday with it's better
features and
> > stability.
> >
> > > You must have been charmed or blessed then, or had a priest bestow
special
> > > blessings on your copy of IE5 when you played a role playing game, or
> > > something. After all, I can think of no *rational* explanation for your
> > > experiences, given the frequency of IE5 crashing or otherwise
misbehaving
> > > on most installations. Mine, for example. True, it *does* crash less
than
> > > IE4 did -- even the IE5 *beta* crashed less. But it is still crash
prone
> > > like any M$ software.
> >
> > --
> > Anthony Huereca
> > http://m3000.1wh.com
> > Press any key to continue and any other key to quit
____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at
http://webmail.netscape.com.
