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