More specifically, he seems to be laboring under some serious
misconceptions. First of all, comparing emacs to MS Word is simply
embarrassing - it's like comparing a flamingo to a banana; basically they
are completely different things. Second, the idea that linux and linux
applications are programmed in a weekend and hence can't stand up to
"months of effort of 100's of professional programmers - i.e. the Windows
development team" is extremely naive. The beauty of open source is that
it's easy to build on other people's work. In reality, linux probably has
hundreds of times as many hours of coding behind it as Windows 2000; ditto
for linux vs. Windows applications. Furthermore, there is no incentive
for linux programmers to write code which will make other programs fail,
not so Microsoft, which has been significant coding effort into breaking
other people's code.
Recall that Metcalfe was the one that claimed the Internet would
"collapse" last year and ended up having to eat a copy of his own article
when it didn't. His prediction regarding the demise of linux should give
linux enthusiasts a warm feeling of confidence regarding the future of
their favorite OS.
On Fri, 25 Jun 1999, Nathan Sportsman wrote:
>
> He's an idiot.
>
> On Fri, 25 Jun 1999, Brandon W. Beasley wrote:
>
> > Would like to get people's response to the following Linux attack:
> >
> > http://www.infoworld.com/articles/op/xml/990621opmetcalfe.xml
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Send administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
