Windows, Linux, The Debate: which is best?

[Billy Verreynne (JW)]

Bryann wrote:

> I would like to point out that being the "best" does not
> necessarily mean much of anything.
<lots of good points snipped>

Well put Bryann. As they say, beauty (aka the "best") is in the eye of
the beholder.

Interesting about OS/2. Despite the superior o/s, IBM lost the
marketing war with Microsoft at the time.. If they did it better, the
desktop o/s market could have been a lot different.

BTW, Windows-NT had an OS/2 console subsystem. Microsoft and IBM had a
source code share agreement after parting their ways. So MS build OS/2
into the NT kernel as a subsystem (as they did with Posix). It worked
pretty darn well - I used it to do a major re-org of a large OS/2
Gupta db in NT 3.5.

And Novell.. Now that brings back memories... And running Microsoft
LAN Manager for DOS over a Novell TCP/IP using an custom made NDIS to
ODI converter TSR. :-)

If anything, the market can and do change. Which means one should not
discard Linux as real threat in the future to the Windows o/s in the
desktop market. But it requires a lot more than hot technical air and
proclaiming o/s superiority to achieve that.

--
Billy

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This e-mail and its contents are subject to the Telkom SA Limited
e-mail legal notice available at
http://www.telkom.co.za/TelkomEMailLegalNotice.PDF
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~