I don't usually, but... 10033

snips

Debian.

Because I have one, because it works, because there's no good reason not to? The machine has more than sufficient capability to do what I expect it to do, so there's no reason not to use it. Except, of course, that one particularly brain-dead OS vendor can't seem to grasp the idea that a 386 and a pentium are, to most intents and purposes, the same damned thing, just with different performance.

They did? Funny, Debian's HW requirements page doesn't say anything about requiring a P4-600 with 480Mb of RAM.

I'll let you in on a little secret... not everyone in the world has access to newer, more modern equipment.

As a simple example, I happen to know of a fair amount of computer equipment going to third world countries. In fact, I actually fix a lot of systems destined for those countries, before it gets shipped.

Those folks simply can't afford to run out and buy a quad athlon with 2Gb of RAM. Or even a pocket calculator. Instead, several outfits collect donated computers, fix 'em up, and deliver them to schools and such in those countries.

So let's ponder this for a moment. We're going to deliver, say, 200 donated computers to a school somewhere. We have a couple of options for them as far as software goes:

1) We can install Win95, maybe Win98... and if you're *lucky*, any software you do get *might* actually still work - but don't bet on it; Office2K3, for example, requires Windows 2000, which will not install on those machines.

2) We can simply throw the machines away, because folks like DFS are convinced that everybody who deserves to use a computer is also sufficiently wealthy to buy a modern machine. You can do without the other little luxuries for a while, you know. Food. That sort of thing.

3) We can try to dig up truly ancient versions of the software for them... I think we could get Office 97, at least for the 486 machines; Office 95 only requires a 386DX. Hmm, better toss the SX clbutt systems.

4) We can deliver something current and modern and functional. Something that they can actually use. Something that they can get - or simply don't need - AV and other such tools for.

So let's see. Of the options available, which actually gets them the computers and a usable selection of software? Oh, right, option four. Of course, option four is simply *not freakin' possible* with Windows, thanks to MS's blind idiocy in forcing pointless hardware requirements on their users, for absolutely no technical reason whatsoever.

On the other hand... hey, what do you know? We can deliver usable, functional, working, *current* Debian-based systems. Complete with GUI, office tools, web tools and so on. Programming tools. Spell checkers. Multiple-language support. All the things they need to actually use the computers as something other than boat anchors.

Now, given the choice between having donated, working - if slow - computers, having no computers, or buying new computers but not having any budget for anything else, which option do you think they will take?

Hmm... imagine that. Only one slight problem... it means that Windows isn't even on the menu - because of MS. Not because of any actual technical issues, as is readily demonstrated by the fact that current Linux distros can work on the systems. Nope, it's purely MS's inability to grasp concepts such as modularity, flexibility and configurability.

Do feel free, however, to tell us such people don't deserve computers. Or food. Or medicine. Or whatever else it is your white bread myopic view of the universe thinks they shouldn't have unless they're pulling in $50K per annum.