Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (2831 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [SLE] Gates [OT]
  • From: Daniel Bauer <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 10:40:32 +0200
  • Message-id: <200607181040.33044.linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Am Dienstag, 18. Juli 2006 10:01 schrieb John Andersen:
> On Monday 17 July 2006 21:34, Orn E. Hansen wrote:
> >   If you look at it, he became this rich because there were bugs in
> > Windows 98.  It's those bugs that keep his company going, producing
> > "cures" in the form of Windows XP and Windows Vista.  And don't put up an
> > innocent face, because the entire Linux community is about "endlesslessy
> > fixing bugs" as well.  It's this "endlessly fixing bugs" that is what is
> > causing the "blocking of the evolution in IT".  If I was to find a reason
> > as to "why" it's allowed ... it's probably because people are afraid of
> > the "IT revolution".
> Man, parsing that hurt my brain.
> It hardly seems fair to say that the Evolution of MS products is
> because of bugs. Linux has evolved too. When I got into linux
> you got a command line and that was it.
> Hardware evolves too. Is the Pentium 4 in exitance because of
> bugs in the 8088?
> You seem to discount the concept of the natural progression of human
> technology, seemingly suggesting that, were it not for ulterior motives
> Adam and Eve would have progressed instantly to Astronauts or Gods.
> Windows is a fundamentally flawed code base, which in spite of all
> its faults, is the most economically successful (for MS) OS ever
> developed, and the most costly (for users) OS ever marketed.
> But bugs are not intentional.

(sorry for my last post, that just went out unintentionally and empty...)

I guess the extreme faultiness of M$ W is a *real* advantage for every
programmer. I developped a data base application for a client on a codeline
based ancient Unix on a 386-PC - and this f***ing program just run for more
than 15 years without any complaint - I had nothing more to do with it. Then,
some years ago, I got the chance to rewrite the application (not because it
didn't work anymore, but because they were afraid, the hardware could die).
I installed my new app on Suse 9.0, and now it just runs and runs and runs -
they never had the slightest problems - which simply means: no more money for
me to gain in supporting them.

On W this would never have happened to me.

On the other hand I see those companies, that are using W (for reasons I
really can't understand) - and the programmers and supporters are there
almost every day, searching for this, fixing that, adapt application to the
latest release, because it wouldn't run anymore due to some changes in
the "system"... And they make a good deal of money thanks to this!

So, if you're a programmer or consultant you should better go on W. It ensures
you to have work all the time, while, if you recommend Linux to your
customers, your customers will be happy, but you're going to die of hunger,
because your applications will still work perfectly even after major updates
of the system.

That might sound ironic, but I am absolutely sure, that many consultants
recommend W *only* out of such reasons. In fact, I couldn't imagine any other
reason to recommend W, except if you're a sadist.

Daniel Bauer photographer Basel Switzerland
professional photography:
special interest site:

Check the headers for your unsubscription address
For additional commands send e-mail to suse-linux-e-help@xxxxxxxx
Also check the archives at
Please read the FAQs: suse-linux-e-faq@xxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >