I have a few points to make here.
#1) The BEST OS is the OS that suits YOUR needs. I could care less what
OS _you_ use, because I don't have to deal with your
headaches/problems/needs/desires.
#2) You show your ignorance in a number of ways. If you are truly as
intelligent as you'd like to make us think, show us by keeping your posts
on topic.
#3) Nobody (with any authority) has ever claimed *x was for the average
user. I personally would feel sorry for any tech support lackey who had
to walk grandma through setting up her ppp/pptp/ppoe/ATM/etc settings.
It's bad enough teaching them how to double click. (Yes I did my time as
tech support.)
#4) Don't knock an OS because of your lack of knowledge. MANY people use
various flavors of unix on a daily basis with no trouble. YOUR lack of
knowledge does not constitute inferior software. (RSA nearly never became
a reality, because they couldn't get people to understand a "public key"
Just because you don't KNOW does not mean the product is inferior. RSA
was (and in my opinion, still is) a GREAT thing.
#5) #4 was basically just to show you how annoying it is to get off
topic. Especially when you dribble on about it.
#6) I probably shouldn't have typed this email, because I was starting
to lose respect for people on this list, for jumping on the trolls'
bandwagon, but here I am, blowing my horn too.
Please, take your advocasy to a newsgroup that deals with the topic.
Maybe you can find some lemmings to agree with you. I prefer to make up
my own opinion about what software I run. I also much prefer to modify
that software for my particular needs. if a cookie cutter OS suits you,
GREAT.. it's one less person *I* have to help via email/newsgroups/IRC.
My .00004 cents.
Jeff Palmer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 4 Jul 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Subject: Windows vs Unix
> From:Charles Booher
> h-64-105-140-243.lnoclli.covad.net
> Tue Jul 3 12:25:05
>
> My second computer was a VA Linux box. I tried to run
> SCO Unix on my first computer but that did not work out
> for a number of reasons.
>
> When Windows 3.0 was young I was working on various
> applications for Sun, HP, Silicon Graphics and all those
> other soon to be defunct Unix Workstation vendors. I was
> one of the first guys to write a P.O. for Rack mounted
> Linux boxes, and I have done a lot of developement with
> X-Windows, Motif, GNU, and all the GNU Toys. I started
> learning Windows 3.0 and worked my way through all the
> other MS developement tool kits starting with the C/C++
> 7.0 compiler and Borland Compilers.
>
> I have been working in both Unix and Windows for the Last
> 10 years.
>
> Windows is a better software system. Linux is free and
> the only use I have had for it in the last four years was
> to set up a cheap router using an obsolete scrap computer.
>
> Unix does very little that is usefull to the average
> computer user.
>
> Unix is not a new technology.
>
> Linux is just a free rewrite of the Unix system.
>
> Where are the application packages for Linux? They are
> mostly a pile of student written science fair experiments
> scattered on a large number of obscure web site. So you
> can download the source to LaTex. Who cares? People buy
> computers to run applications. They don't buy computers
> to run compilers, although Microsoft does make better
> compilers for x86 than GNU.
>
> MSDN is a better development environment than GNU,
> Better software tools create better software.
>
> People don't care how well an operating system works if
> there are no useful applications.
>
> So how is Richard Stallman doing with his Hurd Operating
> system?
>
> The entire GNU-Linux system is nothing more than a
> science fair experiment run by various techno-geeks. As a
> science fair experiment GNU-Linux has its uses.
>
> I have looked very deeply into both systems and Microsoft
> has the better system.
>
> Regards,
>
> Charles
>
>
>
>
