[CentOS] Recommendation for a Linux alternative to Centos - ATH9K disaster

Tue Jan 25 20:21:35 UTC 2011
m.roth at 5-cent.us <m.roth at 5-cent.us>

Gene Brandt wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 15:04 -0500, Brian Mathis wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 2:27 PM, Gene Brandt <brandtg at bellsouth.net>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Chiming in I find CentOs VERY stable. I need this for my User
>> community (Wife and Daughter) It has to look and work the same always.
>> For the new people to Linux I've noted that NT admins can very easily
>> install ubuntu and get it running (for awhile). From what I remember
>> it had a Windozie feel. Coming from the Solaris, AIX, and HP world I
>> prefer stability.
>> I need to call you on this one.  "Windozie" (implying some kind of
>> decent user interface) and "stability" are not mutually exclusive, as
>> your comment suggests.  In the old days you may have had to choose,
>> but that's long past.  Windows 7 is very stable, as is Mac OS X.
>> This is the type of false dichotomy that a certain US-based news
>> network (rhymes with Blox Fews) uses to misinform a naive public.
>> Please don't bring that kind of "logic" into tech discussions.

> Where did I say that!
> "From what I remember it had a Windozie feel"
> In MY opinion ( only an opinion) Winblows will never be stable.

I've got 7 on my work laptop, and my lady's got Vista at home. I *despise*
both of them: they do their best to hide what you need to do, if it's
anything other than looking at pictures, playing music, email, and web.
And, IMO, part of the time they have problems with that.

We won't even *begin* to talk about how the work laptop is so locked down
that even wtih a local admin account, I can't do almost anything....

         mark, yes, I do loathe WinDoze