> Dave Wreski
> Windows: An OS less stable than the people who use it
>
Has anyone ever given much thought to the psychological ramifications
of the anti-MS hysteria that colours the Linux community? Is it really
necessary to expend so much energy vilifying Windoze?
As for the statement above, I realize that opinions vary as much as
individual experience does, but I can assure you that more than one
experienced user of Windows NT has found it to be far more stable than
Linux. This is NOT intended to start yet another tiresome argument
about comparative merits (or demerits, more likely); it's merely a
suggestion that some of this steam could better be directed toward
improving Linux, such as in its installation, rather than toward
condemning NT.
As for 95, well, everyone knows that it's utter rubbish! {:-)
PS: this view is not motivated by the fact that I am an exceptionally
stable NT user.
PPS: there are, it has been suggested, only two industries which call
their customers "users"....
--
David Fisher
Chief Engineer
Fisher Research Corporation
Two Cairn Street
Rochester, New York 14611-2476
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
716 328 4230
fax 328 1984
--
PLEASE read the Red Hat FAQ, Tips, Errata and the MAILING LIST ARCHIVES!
http://www.redhat.com/RedHat-FAQ /RedHat-Errata /RedHat-Tips /mailing-lists
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject.
