Just my 2 cents also.
The main reason I went from M$ to Linux is that I was getting
tired of throwing a tantrum and screaming when my winbloze
crashed and froze the machine, I have zero tolerance for such malfunctions,
and can get very loud, and I admit it, so I ditched winbloze and had to
sacrifice soem features for stability.
I just personally choose not to buy or use M$ products if I can avoid using.
On Mon, 17 Mar 2036, Jaguar mewed:
> 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.
--
Linux Cat
