* none peremptorily fired off this memo:
> DFS had de volgende lumineuze gedachte op 22-04-08 05:57:
>
>> No you haven't. Almost all Linux/OSS products are poorly designed, poorly
>> coded, poorly featured, poorly documented, and receive small amounts of crap
>> testing and QA. That's why they fail and freeze and lockup so much and have
>> so many bugs when they're released in final form.
>>
> You mean they are like Windows Vista, a "work in progress"?
>
>> Look at Ubuntu. Look at the KDE 4.0 release. Look at the history of MySQL.
>> Of OpenOffice.
>> Of Gambas. Of native Linux games, etc etc.
>>
>> You guys need to open your eyes and try to understand and accept something:
>> open source cannot compete with commercial, closed-source programs. And the
>> few exceptions proves the rule.
>
> The problem is: in the case of a negative statement one exception
> disproves the rule.
>
> Erik Jan.
Plus, DFS is simply lying his ass off.
Linux applications are no more problematic than Windows applications.
And there are many OSS projects with great QA procedures, /and/ direct
access to their source-code control repositories based on solid OSS
products like Subversion, Bazaar-NG, or Mercurial.
One of the reasons Linux is making headway in servers and supercomputers
is that it receives a /lot/ of testing.
I'll bet it even compares favorably to FreeBSD. May need some more work
to match OpenBSD's record, but I'm only guessing.
--
People always fear change. People feared electricity when it was invented,
didn't they? People feared coal, they feared gas-powered engines...
There will always be ignorance, and ignorance leads to fear. But with time,
people will come to accept their silicon masters.
-- Bill Gates
|
|
