Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> __/ [ yttrx ] on Friday 02 March 2007 05:26 \__
>
>> B Gruff <bbgruff@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> Now it's from the BBC.
>>>
>>> It seems to me that something that Linux folks have been saying for a
>>> long, long time is now being demonstrated....
>>>
>>> ...MS enthusiasts have often claimed that (paraphrasing) "Linux will never
>>> catch on, because it's too difficult to install", and often the response
>>> has been "That's because people rarely install Windows - their machines
>>> come pre-installed".
>>>
>>> It has always been asserted that a truer test would be to get somebody
>>> (The "my wife" experiment) who was new to each to install both as a
>>> comparison.
>>>
>>> Now what we are seeing is people who are very familiar with Windows (the
>>> equivalent of the "linux geeks") themselves having as much or more trouble
>>> with Vista than your average Joe has installing Linux!
>>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6407419.stm
>>
>> OSX is easier than both.
>
> It's also easier hammering a nail with a rock than it is with your fist. How
> much hardware does OS X run on...?
>
Roy, does it really matter to you how much hardware linux runs on? Do you
really have a MIPS machine lying around to play with? Or an UltraSPARC?
Or an RS/6000 machine?
Face it, the only thing thats important to you is that Linux runs on x86,
so stop pretending.
-----yttrx
--
http://www.yttrx.net
|
|
