Subj : Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?
To   : comp.os.linux
From : chris
Date : Mon Feb 28 2005 10:13 pm

Mxsmanic wrote:

> SINNER writes:
> 
>> Then you have to install the drivers for all the hardware which requires
>> a few reboots ...
> 
> The drivers are usually installed as part of the installation, unless
> you have very unusual hardware.

WRONG!

>> ... then you have to install all the applications you use.
> 
> That's not part of OS installation.

No, but it's a useless installation without any applications!

>> So you're saying you dont have to load the network card drivers, video
>> card drivers, sound card drivers and reboot after each install?
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> That is a blatent lie.
> 
> It's a brutal fact.

You must have a unique version of Win NT then.  Did Bill himself write it
specially for you?
 
>> Do you think people that use Linux have never or arent
>> currenly using Windows as well?
> 
> I think most of them have used Windows, since the primary motivation for
> using Linux among most of its fans is a hatred of Microsoft and Windows.

Wrong.  Most people started using real operating systems because it was what
they were used to - Windoze is a relative newcomer, doesn't fit in with any
real operating systems.  It was pleasant to discover that there was a
viable "home" version of the OS I'd been using at work for over 20 years.

> If there were no Windows, there'd be no Linux.

Wrong.  Linux began as a way to run Unix-type stuff on a home computer -
Windoze had nothing to do with it.  It's just a nice benefit that we can
now run a proper operating system on home computers and delete the M$ trash
that comes "pre-installed" with many machines.

C. 

-- 
Everything gets easier with practice, except getting up in the morning!

.