Option Pack 4 is an app, not a patch. Granted it does fix problems with the previous version, but most administrators will want to use IIS4.0 anyway. IE 4.01 is an app and the other three items tell you to install it anyway. I think the point that some are trying to make is that it is a lot easier to figure out what to install in the Windows world. How much research would it take comparatively to figure out what to install in Linux? If someone were to compile the latest patches for Linux into _one_ downloadable package with a smart install routine on a regular basis so that there were Linux Service Packs, it would go along way in shrinking the ease of use gap.
The fact that Linux Service Packs don't exist yet could be intepreted as proof that it is too difficult to compile the list of current necessary patches. Or it could prove exactly the opposite. The main thing is that people want to have them and/or want to know why there aren't any now.
Everyone has been focusing on usability of Linux vs win*. Maybe I am being too optimistic, but it could be that is not what they are testing at all.
Microsoft not only sells their OS but they also sell software, including games, and hardware (mice, joysticks, gamepads, etc.) They could be comparing usability of Intellimouse, SideWinder under Linux compared to Thrustmaster products. Or they could be examining Loki install routines for reference on future MS Games on Linux. After all Age of Empires II will be in direct competition with Civ:CTP. It could make sense for Microsoft to start offering their games on Linux to gain marketshare as well as give Linux users reasons to like Microsoft. If a good number of Linux users suddenly found themselves playing Microsoft games with Microsoft controllers on their Linux box there would probably be fewer "Microsoft is evil" rants.
Slashdot Mirror
Option Pack 4 is an app, not a patch. Granted it does fix problems with the previous version, but most administrators will want to use IIS4.0 anyway. IE 4.01 is an app and the other three items tell you to install it anyway. I think the point that some are trying to make is that it is a lot easier to figure out what to install in the Windows world. How much research would it take comparatively to figure out what to install in Linux? If someone were to compile the latest patches for Linux into _one_ downloadable package with a smart install routine on a regular basis so that there were Linux Service Packs, it would go along way in shrinking the ease of use gap.
The fact that Linux Service Packs don't exist yet could be intepreted as proof that it is too difficult to compile the list of current necessary patches. Or it could prove exactly the opposite. The main thing is that people want to have them and/or want to know why there aren't any now.
Everyone has been focusing on usability of Linux vs win*. Maybe I am being too optimistic, but it could be that is not what they are testing at all.
Microsoft not only sells their OS but they also sell software, including games, and hardware (mice, joysticks, gamepads, etc.) They could be comparing usability of Intellimouse, SideWinder under Linux compared to Thrustmaster products. Or they could be examining Loki install routines for reference on future MS Games on Linux. After all Age of Empires II will be in direct competition with Civ:CTP. It could make sense for Microsoft to start offering their games on Linux to gain marketshare as well as give Linux users reasons to like Microsoft. If a good number of Linux users suddenly found themselves playing Microsoft games with Microsoft controllers on their Linux box there would probably be fewer "Microsoft is evil" rants.