On 01/25/2011 03:04 PM, Brian Mathis wrote: > 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. I have to agree here as well. Too many times do I see people just blasting other operating systems for these reasons. I'd even go as far as argue that Windows XP is stable too, so long as it's managed, administered, and setup securely and correctly. I don't notice any more crashes on the Ubuntu systems I have set up, compared to those of CentOS/RHEL, or to even Windows XP and 7 systems. And I administer all of the above in the same network. People mix these perceptions up all to frequently, or personally because I simply believe they like to bash other operating systems that they don't like or want to use. Just my 0.02 cents. Regards, Max