2011/1/19 Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> > On 1/19/2011 10:43 AM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > > > >> The difference is that open source server software has been 'feature > >> complete' for ages and the standards processes that change client/server > >> interactions are very, very slow - so outdated versions of server > >> software is not a problem as long as bug/security fixes are made. > >> That's not true for desktop applications and environments. If you don't > >> have something current you are missing the improvements that many > >> thousands of man-hours of work have made. Personally, I use Windows at > > <snip> > > I'll disagree here: I've seen hardly any "improvements" in any of the > > (admittedly not a lot) of software I run. As a definition of this, let me > > note that in '95, PC Mag ran a review of word processors, and noted that > > 90% of the users (then) used only 10% of the features, and the other 10% > > of users who *did* use those features only used them about 10% of the > > time. > > You are biased by having learned to live with the restrictions of old > cruft. At the very least you have to be able to exchange data files and > view all common media files on a desktop. What do you do when someone > gives you a docx or xlsx file? > > > The last "oh, I like this" feature I can remember was when firefox > > introduced tabs. On the other hand, a *lot* of "improvements" I find more > > and more objectionable, such as thunderbird trying *very* hard to look > and > > act more and more like Lookout, er, Outlook, and I *LOATHE* the latest > > versions of Outlook. > > Sorry, but Outlook 2003 and 2007 are huge improvements over earlier > versions - and lacking tight integration between messaging and > calendar/scheduling has been one of the places where free software > really missed the boat. > > And remember that firefox/openoffice are rare exceptions in RHEL/Centos > in that they have had major-version updates since the distro release, > even though they still are far behind 'current' now. The rest of the > distro is much older and doesn't do much of what people do with desktops > today (subscribing to podcasts, media playing, serving media to other > devices, etc.). so, in the end, i believe we all agree that the distro choice depends on the user needs . -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110119/6f976ba4/attachment-0005.html>