100th post to this thread - I stopped reading it around 62. On Jan 31, 2008 1:13 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Chris Jones wrote: > > > >> I mean that as opposed to having logical reasons or evidence to back > >> them up. > > > > What exactly needs 'proving' ? Fedora have decided, for better or worse, > > to take the path they have. They don't need to justify that choice to > > anyway. Whether they get (or keep) any users is justification enough. > > It doesn't 'need' proving - but without proof it's fair to call it > religion or a cult and maintain an appropriate distance. > > >> To whatever extent this fragments the installed base and makes it > >> difficult for 3rd party software to run across the variations it works > >> against the general acceptability of Linux and hurts everyone. We are > >> just continuing the old unix flavor wars that gave Microsoft an easy > >> monopoly and ensuring that things can't change. > > > > Anti-septic hurts, but in the long run it helps cure problems. > > They said that about blood-letting too. > > > Fedora (I > > believe) are promoting what in the long term is the right way to go > > (IMHO). Time will tell if it is truly the correct approach(/treatment). > > It's been more than a decade now (if you count fedora as an extension of > the earlier RH model) and it just continues to help the monopoly make > more money. Doesn't someone define insanity as expecting different > results from continuing to do the same thing? > > -- > Les Mikesell > lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx > > -- > > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list >
