M
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]
If you will note, my post specifies Linux, not FOSS software across the
board. Open/FreeBSD is an excellent system, and I commend Mac on using it
as their core. As for backwards compatibility, you obviously are only
talking about compatibility within the pre OS X and OS X and later systems,
right, and not between?
As for compiling it yourself, I am a user and have NO intentions of having
to learn to program, compile and use my personal time to get something to
work on a system warranted to "just work."
If you are one of those geeks, fine, go ahead and compile. For me, I prefer
to use my computer for productive work or increase my Quake III abilities,
not muck around some obscure code trying to get a freakin' wireless card to
work on my notebook.
--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]
Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All mail sent
to my personal account will be deleted without reading.
After furious head-scratching, Gerry Hickman asked this group:
| Hi Milly,
|
|| And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future,
|| just a comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.
|
| I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
| different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
| Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
| But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is
| not free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So
| personally, I think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux
| have far more potential for the future.
|
| The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
| that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the
| bug the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
| Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
| offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
| regard...
board. Open/FreeBSD is an excellent system, and I commend Mac on using it
as their core. As for backwards compatibility, you obviously are only
talking about compatibility within the pre OS X and OS X and later systems,
right, and not between?
As for compiling it yourself, I am a user and have NO intentions of having
to learn to program, compile and use my personal time to get something to
work on a system warranted to "just work."
If you are one of those geeks, fine, go ahead and compile. For me, I prefer
to use my computer for productive work or increase my Quake III abilities,
not muck around some obscure code trying to get a freakin' wireless card to
work on my notebook.
--
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]
Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact. All mail sent
to my personal account will be deleted without reading.
After furious head-scratching, Gerry Hickman asked this group:
| Hi Milly,
|
|| And, no, nothing in my post is negative about Microsoft's future,
|| just a comment on the overblown fantasies about Linux.
|
| I believe Apple is bsed on OpenBSD (?), so in some ways it's not that
| different to Linux. It has a better UI, Mac legacy compatibility, and
| Microsoft have always offered Office for Mac, so again that's a bonus.
| But the big downside, as I see it, is that this additional layer is
| not free/Free or open-source, and is also tied to hardware. So
| personally, I think things like FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Solaris and Linux
| have far more potential for the future.
|
| The most incredible thing I find with the open source alternatives, is
| that when there's a bug, or behaviour you don't like, simply fix the
| bug the same day and re-compile! It beats waiting for companies like
| Microsoft to spend months releasing simple hotfixes that are only
| offered via PPS and phone. I don't see how Apple is any better in this
| regard...