On 18 Nov 2002 at 2:31, Ruben I Safir wrote:
This is more gibberish. The sole reason for their success is that it comes PREINSTALLED on nearly ever computer in the world. Just yesterday a partner at a firm I work with was having a stunningly unfixable with Windows which brought her whole workflow to a halt because of an AOL upfgrade and a virtual memormy error.
She feels REAL productive.
Ruben
Spot on! The idea that Windows is easier to install than Linux is a myth, and has been for some time. I have to install both Windows and Linux. If I'm installing Linux I allow about an hour, after which I expect to be doing work on the machine. If I plan to install Windows then I will allow at least a day, two days if there is anything unusual about the hardware. On top of that I would expect it to be several weeks before I've located all the annoying things where Windows assumes I don't know what I'm doing and does something different, and turned them off. The problem is, as Ruben pointed out obliquely, that most people do not install Windows, but if they want to use Linux then they do have to install it. This gives rise to the myth that Linux is more difficult to install. IMHO it's not an accident that, as came out during the Microsoft anti- trust trial, one of the things Microsoft was most desperate to prevent was allowing the pre-installation of Linux on PCs. alan -- http://www.ibgames.net/alan Registered Linux user #6822 http://counter.li.org Winding Down - Weekly Tech Newsletter - subscribe at http://www.ibgames.net/alan/winding/mailing.html