Why most run Microsoft, not RedHat

[Les Mikesell]

Scott van Looy wrote:
> Today Les Mikesell did spake thusly:
> 
>> Scott van Looy wrote:
>>>> You must have a different version than I do. But really, this
>>>> discussion is somewhat silly.
>>>
>>> Possibly, but it's been like this for 8 years...you can't compare 
>>> Win98 or something with FC6, that's just ridiculous
>>
>> Why not?  The concepts that make make fedora and all other Linux 
>> versions straightforward to install and keep running were inherited 
>> from  unix and well known by the mid-80's.  Microsoft just chose to 
>> ignore them.
> 
> I believe you're forgetting the "fun" of linux in 1998 - or was your 
> copy of Redhat 5 just as good as FC6?

There were problems getting linux drivers to work on certain hardware 
back then, but it was as good in terms of 'if it worked once it will 
keep working' and if anything broke it could be fixed by replacing the 
appropriate file.  By RH7.3 it was about as solid as anything before or 
since... I have one of those that is within a couple of months of a 
4-year uptime (counter has rolled twice) - and for a few years before 
that it was only down for the reboots to update the kernel.

*Every* windows box here has been down many times due to virus attacks 
and the updates required to prevent more of them in that time span.

-- 
   Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell at gmail.com