On 23/05/06, Bryan J. Smith <b.j.smith@ieee.org> wrote:
Anyone who supported Windows NT 3.1, 3.5, 3.51 and 4.0 during the Windows 95/98/SE era will tell you that Windows NT often had _less_ drivers than even Linux at times!
:-))) I remember that well :-(
I wouldn't run Linux then, and you're running it for the _wrong_ reasons.
:-) is there really a wrong reason for using Linux?
I run Linux because it _easier_. Then again, I came from UNIX and not Windows. I do training and step #1 is to "de-program" people from how they think computers work, because it's only how Windows works.
Hmm.... I'll await the howls of protest but surely not. We are talking about the PC here not a workstation linked to a mainframe. The mainframe/workstation set up is different to the original PC that came from IBM. I know that there were earlier incarnations of the small form factor computer but for all intent and purpose the PC as we know it came about because of IBM's offerings. IBM first used a DOS for those PC's. Now, feel free to correct me but didn't Microsoft either write that software or come in very soon after and started to write the software? So, really, the Microsoft way is actually the initial way of having an operating system. Linux, as a Unix way of doing things came about a few years later. Please note that nowhere have I said the Microsoft way is the correct way :-) Just because they were first does not mean they were, or indeed, are correct in their method of running an operating system on the PC. I believe the *nix way is far better. I imagine IBM couldn't afford the then available Unix on their new range of PC's because of prohibitive costs? -- ============================================== I am only human, please forgive me if I make a mistake it is not deliberate. ============================================== PLEASE DON'T drink and drive it's not clever, it's just stupid. Kevan Farmer Linux user #373362 Cheslyn Hay Staffordshire WS6 7HR