On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 17:34 +0100, Kevanf1 wrote:
Erm, I think there is something that nobody has really said here in relation to the article. It is not a level playing field! The guy says it takes longer to install SuSE 9.3 than XP. What sort of install was it? Even a basic SuSE install gives you a wide range of software besides the OS. By this I mean full office software. Does XP? Nope. Then let's take a look at hardware comaptibility. If the hardware manufacturers wrote drivers for Linux then yes, it could be compared like for like with Microsoft software. Until then it cannot be. This is not SuSE's fault or Novell's it is part of a bigger argument about M$ and their business practises. It affects me as I have hardware that will not run under Linux, I accept this and just look forward to the day that the manufacturers have sense. After all, I have a television which picks up the 5 terrestrial stations here in the UK. If I want SKY I have to buy a SKY box. So I can't compare my tv to a tv that will pick up SKY broadcasts. But this is what so many people do with Linux and M$.
I have had direct email contact with him. He told me he was doing an FTP install. I pointed out to him that the FTP install version is not available for 9.3 and he stated he got it from a co-worker. His answer... "3. I used the FTP install from a developer connected to my company. The INQ is not on Novell's list of favorite people to get free review copies so I took the opportunity to try it from that and still be current." Go figure why he had problems. -- Ken Schneider UNIX since 1989, linux since 1994, SuSE since 1998 "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't suck is probably the day they start making vacuum cleaners." -Ernst Jan Plugge