linux will no doubt be run by 75% of the world before too long becuase its open source, and is STABLE.
Bovine Sewage. In the four months I've had it installed on my system (Mandrake 6) Linux has not only crashed itself a dozen times, it has allowed me to crash it by making innocent, newbie-type mistakes. Half of these times, the only solution has been to reinstall it.
Straight out of the box with no tweaks whatsoever, it will not properly shut itself down if X-windows is loaded during a session, and therefore tells me it's safe to power down when in reality there are still open files, hence it must go through fsck the next time I reboot.
I'm not a computer newbie. As a profession, I work intimately with the hardware, software and various OS's, and have for over 15 years. I haven't had this much trouble with any Windows OS. It just doesn't lend itself to ease of use; it still revels in its cryptic command names, vague and incomplete documentation, forcing one to become an expert at Unix before one can effectively use it.
But that isn't what most people need nor want in an OS. Their computer is a tool to help them do useful, productive things. Most people do not count tweaking with and fixing their tools among the useful and productive things they need to do. I don't want to spend most of my morning tweaking and adjusting my car's engine, brakes and transmission; I just want to get in and drive it to work!
Europa, if inhabited (by any life) could be enormously useful ('uncontaminated') by virtue of being a huge, somewhat isolated biosphere.
Are we forgetting that little but not insignificant variation of Heisenburg's uncertainty principle? Even if we avoid contaminating Europa this time, what makes us think it won't get contaminated when we visit the place on purpose? You mean we can make sure no little microbes hitch a ride with us on our next trip, be it manned or unmanned?
Slashdot Mirror
Bovine Sewage. In the four months I've had it installed on my system (Mandrake 6) Linux has not only crashed itself a dozen times, it has allowed me to crash it by making innocent, newbie-type mistakes. Half of these times, the only solution has been to reinstall it.
Straight out of the box with no tweaks whatsoever, it will not properly shut itself down if X-windows is loaded during a session, and therefore tells me it's safe to power down when in reality there are still open files, hence it must go through fsck the next time I reboot.
I'm not a computer newbie. As a profession, I work intimately with the hardware, software and various OS's, and have for over 15 years. I haven't had this much trouble with any Windows OS. It just doesn't lend itself to ease of use; it still revels in its cryptic command names, vague and incomplete documentation, forcing one to become an expert at Unix before one can effectively use it.
But that isn't what most people need nor want in an OS. Their computer is a tool to help them do useful, productive things. Most people do not count tweaking with and fixing their tools among the useful and productive things they need to do. I don't want to spend most of my morning tweaking and adjusting my car's engine, brakes and transmission; I just want to get in and drive it to work!
Are we forgetting that little but not insignificant variation of Heisenburg's uncertainty principle? Even if we avoid contaminating Europa this time, what makes us think it won't get contaminated when we visit the place on purpose? You mean we can make sure no little microbes hitch a ride with us on our next trip, be it manned or unmanned?