why not OS X?

[Christopher Murtagh]

On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Thomas Kernes wrote:
>Christopher Murtagh: not everyone needs to tinker with the machine.
>Some people actually need to work with applications that other people
>have written...like Office, Photoshop, Illustrator, etc.  The
>alternatives don't always suffice.

 Great. All I'm saying is if they don't suffice, don't use them. Linux
gives you the ability to tinker and that's why *many* people like it. If
you don't, thats fine, but don't whine to us about it.

> Do you run Linux on a i386 hand-held?  If you don't, then what
>difference does it make?  William never said it was a pain, he said he
>found it easier to use OS X.

 No, but I do run it on a lot of older hardware and we specifically chose
linux as our OS because we new we could scale up way beyond a G4 if we
needed to. My system currently consists of 7 G4s and a 4 node briQ box. If
I need more CPU power in any given machine, I can upgrade to an E450, put
linux on it and have a near identical operating system on all of my
hardware. Try doing that with OS X.

>Just because it is free doesn't automatically make it better.  Linux
>elitism is no better than any other kind.

 It has nothing to do with elitism, and yes free is better, but open is
best. If you don't get that, then you don't get open source cuz that's
what it's all about.

Chris