Re: Annoyances

Thus quoth Mo McKinlay on Wed, Sep 17, 2003 at 11:29:43PM +0100:
> Similarly, "Linux" is becoming increasingly a term which is only worth using
> to describe what it actually is - a kernel. Debian and RedHat are no more
> similar than Debian and FreeBSD. Each "distribution" is an OS - not just a
> collection of software ported to a kernel. The fact that each of these
> operating systems are based on the same code for various parts of the system
> doesn't actually make much of a difference (anybody who's struggled trying
> to install RPMs from non-free vendors such as IBM on a non-RedHat system
> will soon testify to that).

Whatever its name, if it comes with ls, vi, sh and cc compiles your code,
then it's a kind of Unix. 

> sysadmin would tell you that you were taking a big gamble if you were going
> to switch from Windows to Solaris and it expect it to be anything but pain
> if you weren't used to UNIX. Many Linux-based systems fall into the same

But if you're used to one variety of Unix, you easily switch to any other.

> The third category of users are even trickier - NeXT, then Apple, managed to
> do something quite stunning - produce a version of UNIX which, for the most
> part, wrapped everything up into a nice user-friendly GUI that a graphic
> designer could use. The sheer number of man-hours which have gone into this
> - and they've done it by focussing on a specific goal - are immense. I

What a waste of time. 

Kind regards,


Daniel von Asmuth

-- 
	wat heb je nodig bij een uitzichtloos leven? euthanasie?
	nee, windows.
	van microsoft?
	nee, van glas.