John Newbigin wrote:
Ryan wrote:
On Thu, 29 Sep 2005 16:58:42 -0500 Mike McCarty mike.mccarty@sbcglobal.net wrote:
I'd prefer that Linux flourish and not die just because MS is willing to do more of what is necessary to make life easier on customers than some other organization which supports Linux is willing to do.
Its apples and oranges. MS can afford to do whatever their customers want since Windows, Office, and all their other software is *theirs* (or licensed for their use).
When was the last time that MS fixed a but that you reported? I doubt
Where in my message did I say that MS does a better job of doing anything? Or are you trying to disagree with Ryan? Or what?
[snip]
If something with linux is wrong, anyone can fix it. Linus, RedHat, me, anyone I pay to do it for me. If linux was blue screening (sounds like windows to me) then they should do a crashdump, find the bug and fix it. Still cheaper and easier than windows.
Where did I say people should use Windows rather than Linux?
Good luck solving a windows problem by looking at a stop screen.
I'd also like to know how windows autoupdate is better than any redhat up2date style tool. Do SAP say "You can put any MS shit on here that you like but if you run Linux you need to have a proper test procedure"? I don't think so.
Man, point out something about the attitude of Red Hat suport, and suddenly all the worms start crawling out of the wood work.
I'm not AGAINST anything. I'm not against MicroSoft. I'm not against Linus Torvalds, I'm not against Windows. I'm not against Linux. I'm not against RH.
I have seen the RH attitude complained about several times, and not just by me.
MS also has an attitude. So, I'm supposed to accept the attitude of one company because another one ALSO has an attitude?
MS has advantages RH doesn't have. So, like Avis (I think the car rental that ran those ads) they must "try harder". But they don't.
Mike