[Leaplist] Comparing Linux apples to Windows oranges -- Re: Reason #41525 to not "trust" microsoft products

[Bryan J. Smith]

From: "Ram K. Singh" <rksingh54 at yahoo.com>
> In fact American Zombie told me that if  removed XP,
> HP would not honor my warranty. I took a chance and
> removed Vista anyway. But the question is why should
> an average user become a geek trying to load Linux on
> a notebook that came with Windows?

The question really is ...

  "Why should an average user become a geek trying
   to load Windows on a notebook that came with
   another OS/version?"

> I have been struggling to find a distro that would
> work half as smoothly as Vista did;

"Install" or "work"?

Did you "install" Vista on your notebook?  Was your notebook "Designed
for Vista"?  Did you try installing Vista on an older notebook "Designed
for XP"?  Did you try to install XP on a newer notebook "Designed for
Vista"?

Please, as an over-certified, over-exposed, over-abused (even as a Linux
consultant from a leading Linux vendor) Microsoft Windows and other
Product/Technology expert, please do not over-state Windows.

Also remember to compare Linux apples to Windows apples, not Linux
apples to Windows oranges.  Do not change the context to fit where it
does not.  I had this discussion off-list, that you should get Linux
pre-installed on your notebook.

> and that is after making a lot of effort to laod Linux and get it
> working.

The same can be said for Windows XP and Vista.

Speaking of "provisioning" in another thread, I have an infrastructure
that not only PXE boots 15,000 Linux servers, not only another 4,000
Windows servers, but tens of thousands of Linux and Windows
desktops.  ;)

You wanna talk about supporting Windows desktops, we're not only using a
Linux infrastructure (instead of Microsoft RIS) to do it, but the
"workload" to support installation and provisioning of anything Windows
is incomparable to Linux -- at the desktop.  ;)

> In fact, I am getting convinced that it may be better
> for average user to pay a few bucks and own a working
> computer rather than have Linux on notebook for just
> bragging right.

Please _stop_ this.  You're doing the apples-oranges.

Linux works.  It works out-of-the-box when pre-installed.
This is *0* different than Windows XP or Vista.

Likewise, it's the _same_ exact argument post-installed.
I will bring over 10 notebooks and we'll do XP/Vista installs sometime.

I'll watch you get frustrated with Windows.  ;)

> Linux has never arrived where an average user can find
> a distro that works on the computer he bought loaded
> with Windows.

"Windows has never arrived where an average user can find a version that
works with the computer he or she bought with another OS or version of
Windows."

*0* difference.  Please stop, okay?  ;)

>  It is nothing more than a little brother
> of Unix, unusable and unfriendly.

So is the Windows XP and Vista installers.

Not only for end-users, but when you're trying to deploy tens of
thousands of systems.  And don't even get me started on "stateless."

I've spent enough time working with Windows PE lately that I'm the "best
friend" of the Windows engineering group at my client.  ;)



-- 
Bryan J  Smith              Professional, Technical Annoyance
mailto:b.j.smith at ieee.org  http://www.linkedin.com/in/bjsmith
-------------------------------------------------------------
           Fission Power:  An Inconvenient Solution