Slashdot Mirror
Linux Can't Kill Windows
nberardi writes "Infoworld is running an article in which the author claims 'Linux is established and has a niche that, as various pendulums swing, will grow and shrink. Show me charts and stats and benchmarks that prove Linux superior to Windows in every measure and I'll not argue with you. But no matter how much money and dedication is poured into Linux, it will never put a dent in Windows' mind share or market share because Linux is an operating system, a way -- and probably the best way -- to make system hardware do what it's told. But you can't turn Linux into a platform even if you brand it, box it, and put a pricey sticker on it.'"
How is Linux/BSD something entirely different from OSX? They are all *nix based (more or less) operating systems. The only difference is that OSX has a prettier interface and more boxed apps available. You could argue that it's a better whatever you want to call it, but to put them in entirely different categories is silly.
Free Mac Mini Yeah, it's
Linux is "a way -- and probably the best way -- to make system hardware do what it's told"?? Are you kidding?
Let's ignore for a moment the fact that there is commodity PC hardware that won't even work properly under linux, and I'm speaking about some brands of 802.11g wifi, video cards, tv tuner cards, etc., becasue there are no fully functioning device drivers for it. Let's set this aside.
The fact that you have to re-compile the kernel every time you install any hardware is completely insane. This is the best way to interface with hardware - recompiling the OS every time the hardware changes?
In many cases, under windows xp you don't even have to reboot when you install new device drivers for hardware.
Ok, you can all start the flaming about security etc. It's very easy for linux to be secure when the OS won't recoginze the network card.
I don't even recall having this problem with Windows 3.11. Windows has just worked well for me in general, heck even Windows 95 was stable.