On 2003-11-28 10:03:58 +0000 Graham Trott gt@pobox.com wrote:
I think we get onto dangerous ground claiming that Linux is "better than" Windows - or vice versa. One isn't better than the other; they're each better at some things. Windows excels at game play and driving new hardware (try finding a DVD copier for Linux) but requires you to restart the machine regularly and pay for pretty well everything you use. Linux is good for "always on" use, makes an undisputedly better server and IMHO is preferable for code development as it's more predictable and easier to organize. But I need a Windows box next to it for a variety of things, including deployment testing and even for some websites that assume IE.
Hrm, well, I'm not sure about this, surely you could do the same method as with a normal CD to get a perfect copy... I.E. dd the DVD to a file, use the (numerous) DVD writing software to burn back the image you just created... then again, just *WHY* are you wanting to copy DVDs? ;)
Things are improving fast and in many areas the gap is closing, but Linux on the desktop hasn't got anywhere near the critical mass needed to attract commercial software writers to port their products and make the system a viable alternative to Windows for the average Joe.
Hrm - dunno about that, the only big stumbling block is IE, which them damned web developers appear to like (stupid people, non standards compliant, messes up perfectly valid CSS, etc, etc, not going here this morning), and as for commercial software, which bits are you meaning? There's quite a few of the IDE manufacturers out there now writing linux versions... For pretty things, we've got RenderMan and family... Commercial software is all well and good, but with a OS moving as fast as linux, they can't keep up with the development and the new libraries etc, and they don't tend to like letting out their source.
So let's avoid "better" unless we really enjoy pointless arguments. The Mac has survived (so far) on being "different". Use that as a base and avoid the mistakes they made. Softly softly catchee monkey.
Let's think here... Mac is an entirely different kettle of fish, 1 architecture, in effect, limited, same as windows... Now, think about this carefully, between Linux and NetBSD there's not a hell of a lot of architectures left in the world that we can't run on. We may not have 'immediate' support for hardware, but it's usually not far behind, especially on popular kit, nvidea cards as an example (though, I don't like that example, binary drivers *SPIT*).
To see a quite well crafted (non-free due to crossover office and some other things), debian based, desktop solution, go look at Xandros, it works rather well (http://www.xandros.com/).
Right, end of pointless rant.
Brett.