Why Linux works for some, and Windows works for others 168 plus 115

begin Error Log for Tue, 28 Jun 2005 03:41:55 -0400 - dfs

Ah, I see...you paid for the system, but all the software on it was free. Right, the price you paid was *only* for the hardware.

Bullpoo. I've purchased plenty of OSS distros and services, price is not the only consideration, but it is a big one. Anyone who goes around throwing good money after bad products is an idiot.

I don't mind paying for something that, in my opinion, is worth paying for. Linux is better, just so happens that it also offers the best value for my money.

Sure it is, by your standards, which we already know are lower from using substandard software.

Left to your auspices, even the best hardware running Linux would chicken up in some form or fashion. You are incompetent when it comes to Linux, we know this.

"I can do that too, I just don't feel like it right now."

"That's no big deal, I just don't see the point in trying."

"So what, those grapes are probably sour anyway."

Leave it to a wintard to totally ignore a display of the power of a REAL OS like Linux in action but attempt to make a big deal out of a screen blanking itself when the time is changed ahead.

True, Linux fails to run all the malware that Windows runs without a problem, even without user intervention.

It also fails to find new and interesting ways to destroy itself like Windows does if it isn't constantly babied.

-- rapskat - 04:00:11 up 3 days, 9 min, 5 users, load average: 0.40, 1.11, 1.10 "That vulnerability is completely theoretical." -- Microsoft L0pht, Making the theoretical practical since 1992.