Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 22nd Jul 2007 15:26 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 257432
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
It does not matter if it is Microsoft's fault or not. If there are no drivers, then there are no drivers.
Linux was in a "not at fault" position for many drivers for quite a while some years ago ... but still some people did not try Linux because there were no drivers ... Linux's fault or not.
I hope you're not suggesting that Linux has more drivers than Windows has...
As many of us already do, choose your sistem then look for hardware for which drivers are provided, then buy a machine for which ALL drivers are released and stable 64bit. It goes like this since DOS era, will work for all of us.
I hope you're not suggesting that Linux has more drivers than Windows has...
Of course I wouldn't suggest that ... I would flat-out state it.
It is a given. Every time you try to install Windows, you will have to go and search for drivers from another source far more often than any time you install Linux.
That is the plain fact. A Linux distribution install disk comes with far more drivers than any Windows OS disk comes with.






Member since:
2007-02-17
It does not matter if it is Microsoft's fault or not. If there are no drivers, then there are no drivers.
Linux was in a "not at fault" position for many drivers for quite a while some years ago ... but still some people did not try Linux because there were no drivers ... Linux's fault or not.