Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 30th Mar 2007 20:44 UTC, submitted by theosib
Permalink for comment 226335
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 21:03 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 20:46 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/14/13 17:32 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-02-17
Hardware compatibility is a very bad example. Linux supports much more hardware than Windows. Even if your restrict the comparison to the few harware platforms Windows supports (namely Intel-x86 compatible). It's true that there are devices without Linux support on x86, but the converse is true in that there are many pieces of hardware for the x86 architecture supported under LInux without any Windows support.
If you look at EM64T, for which there actually is some Windows support, Linux has far more extensive hardware support than Windows Vista 64 or XP 64. I doubt XP 64 will ever have any reasonable leve of hardware support.