Actually I think the author achieved EXACTLY what he intended and it was
CERTAINLY what I intended when I posted the link here.  That is to say a
lively discussion where people really think about what they say before they
type it (well, most of you anyway :=)

On the other hand, I tend to agree with most of what he says taken
literally.  IOW, it is NOT Linux that lacks stability (I think the title was
intended to provoke).  And while it would be ideal if the ever changing AND
improving desktop experience is hugely beneficial, the missed details do not
help us gain mass acceptance.

I, like others, am irritated when something that worked in release X no
longer works in release Y and I hope we see that happening less in the
future.  I think Ubuntu Team and Shuttleworth have done an awesome job
improving the distro over time.  I like time based releases even with the
problems they cause.  I do think a bit more scope control and a LOT more
community testing would help control the glitches.

As to stable versus cutting edge release selection, people that build/work
production systems have no business being on the bleeding edge as someone
else wrote here.  Others, like me, make a concious decision to not stay with
a known stable system for years.  What we lack, IMHO, is a good way for
people to make those choices and the wherewithall to teach them how.

-- 
Dazed_75 a.k.a. Larry

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions,
that I wish it always to be kept alive.
 - Thomas Jefferson