On 04/02/2011 01:38 PM, Big Steel wrote:
On 4/2/2011 7:21 AM, Alias wrote:
On 04/02/2011 01:15 PM, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:
ray wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:40:37 +0100, Gordon wrote:

On 01/04/2011 05:00, Student wrote:
Linux has always intrigued me and I have tried many distros.

I now have a computer with eSATA. I had a spare hard disk and
eSata enclosure.

To pass my time I tried Linux again tonight.

I tried Ubuntu, Mint gnome and Mint debian based.

Honestly Linux missed the boat just as IBM missed the boat with
OS2.

I am firmlly entrenched in windows 7 at home and xp at my office.


xxx
Missed the boat with WHAT?

Evidently, marketing. IMHO, that was IBM's shortcoming with OS2 -
they had a better product.

Marketing is a factor, sure, but that alone doesn't explain why a system
costing $100 to $300 overwhelms one that is free. Progress in Linux
seems to be a measure of how closely it imitates Windows.


Sorry, but it's the other way round. Beryl and Compiz came out before
Aero and is much more configurable. A mini view from the task bar of
open apps came out in Linux long before Vista had it. Linux has had
multiple imaging programs long before Windows 7 had it. Linux had a UAC
long before Vista. Windows has yet to have multiple desktops without
third party programs. Windows has yet to have one source for updates.
Windows has yet to have the architecture that Linux has to prevent
malware. The reason that Windows is number one is not quality but
marketing and FUD, FUD which you seemed to have swallowed whole.


You can keep that little pipe dream going about how Linux as an
architecture to prevent malware. I no more belive than I believe you.


And the reason you think I would care what someone who has some big
steel stuck up his ass believes?

--
Alias