RE: 10 fundamental differences between Linux and Windows
Whilst I am no great fan of MS. applications - I grew up with Lotus 123 etc (after becoming familiar with VisiCalc and VisiFile) and still prefer the flexibility and power of the Lotus successors - I've yet to be convinced that Linux can offer the 'transparency' of the Windows OS. I switch on my Laptop, select the relevant application, then I use it; sticking discs in the appropriate slots as necessary, printing results if I need and then shut down or close the lid as and when I want. I do that day after day, often without even considering whether I'm running Win XP, Win 2K, Win 98, MSDOS, or occasionally Vista. If a problem arises with an application I sort it and, yes, that sometimes means waking up the Command Window. In difference number 9 Jack asks "And besides, who doesn't want to manually edit the /etc/fstab fle?" Well, I don't!
I just want a stable OS that will accept a wide variety of applications that turn this lump of mixed materials into an immensely useful tool. I have tried Linux (Suse 9.x I think): running on an old Toshiba 4000CDT. My impressions, visually, were pretty good; the installation wasn't too onerous; but the performance - with just the GUI running - was absolute CRAP compared with the Win 2K that the machine normally runs while it behaves as a 'practice' Domino Server and a whole raft of other Apps: none of which, of course, would run on Linux; even if Linux could be persuaded to get above crawling pace!
I know the Application area is getting better but, until a Linux 'user machine' can be built that is as flexible and transparent as my current MS Windows system, I shall not be switching - except to occasionally try to see if it has got anywhere yet. I can be a geek - but I don't want to have to be every day!
Mike Kemp
Lotus Notes Specialist
