On Sun, 2004-02-22 at 06:57, xyzzy@xxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Right, and state of the art MB's, notebooks etc. indeed do not always > > (completely) work. So, unfortunately, we as Linux users have to be > > very careful when buying such hardware. *Always* do some research > > *before* buying HW. > > Thus, Linux stays as a hobbyist/hacker system for the desktop. I'm sorry, that just doesn't make sense. Bleeding edge HW support is for production and solid, stable HW for hobbyists? > If vendors have hidden contracts or are being blackmailed by M$, what good > would it do to complain to them about their lack of support for Linux? The history of Linux is full of vendors doing an about-face due to feedback from Linux users. Do you remember back when Diamond was insanely guarding the interface for their video cards? They said that hell would freeze over before they released the specs for them. Less than one year later they started publishing the full specs on their web site. MS was pissed but there was nothing they could do about it. > I didn't say anything about "good" or "bad" here aside from the pragmatic > observation that M$'s OS works for me and Linux doesn't. As I said before, it's ok for you to run WinXP. I really don't mind. Honest. > This is the crux of why M$ still has the stranglehold it has in the > desktop market and will continue to for a good long while even if the > Open Source solution is free. Free, in any way, doesn't matter if it > doesn't work. From what I see here, M$ doesn't have anything to worry > about with its desktop solutions for quite a while. I'm afraid that MS does not agree with you on this matter. -- Kuramarujo - http://www.webtrek.com/~klemmerj/sumo.html
