Linux-v-Windows (was Linux Upgrades)

On Fri, 2004-01-16 at 12:45, MCR wrote:
> > Good point. That also has been my experience. Still,
> > even from
> > scratch Windows install is not nearly as much like
> > dental work
> > as any Linux distro I've ever seen. Don't get me
> > wrong, I'm no MS
> > fan. But I have a healthy respect for large weapons.
>
> My experience's have been just the opposite. I run
> Slack on all my system, and rarely have a problem
> getting anything configured. I tried to play around
> with Win 2000 once. They did not have support for the
> netgear FA311 Nic. Usually no problem, download the
> driver install it, yeah right this is windows we are
> talking about. I went to install it, got the blue
> screen, restarted the computer and got a message that
> I have to, again, restart the computer, this time in
> safe mode, remove what I was doing, then restart
> again. This happened twice in a row. Well that
> computer now has linux on it, with absolute no problem
> with installs or configurations. I have 11 computers
> in this house. One has windows on it, because that is
> the only computer in this house that I could get
> windows to run correctly on. The others are either
> Slack or Solaris 9, with the only configuration issue
> of getting Solaris to work with my Nic. So when you
> refer to an O/S that is like pulling teeth to install,
> I take that as a reference to windows, not linux.
---
there is a large amount of 'the devil you know is better than the devil
you don't know' factored into this equation.

Obviously Windows works for a large segment of the desktop computer
market - and we can debate the hassle factor and the satisfaction
factors.

A person that is very knowledgable about one type of system should be
able to make the other work without too much trouble.

Craig