Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 26th Aug 2009 22:23 UTC
When Windows Vista was launched, the Free Software Foundation started its BadVista campaign, which was aimed at informing users about what the FSF considered user-restrictive features in Vista. Luckily for the FSF, Vista didn't really need a bad-mouthing campaign to fail. Now that Windows 7 is receiving a lot of positive press, the FSF dusted off the BadVista drum, and gave it a fresh coat of paint.
Thread beginning with comment 380807
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.
Member since:2005-10-05
Off-topic from the main article, yes. off-topic from the parent post, no.
And I wouldn't say that upgrading dozens of computers every six months is "just out of the question" in and of itself, kinda depends on the situation. For large deployments with exotic configurations and old software/hardware, it probably would be out of the question to do something major like a distro upgrade every 6 months. But not every distribution pushes radical changes down the pipe every release, and not every distribution even cares much about releases, like the previously mentioned Gentoo and Arch.
Member since:2005-06-30
Off-topic from the main article, yes. off-topic from the parent post, no.
Yeah, I know. I guess it's better drifting from the main article than feeding the trolls.
And I wouldn't say that upgrading dozens of computers every six months is "just out of the question" in and of itself, kinda depends on the situation. For large deployments with exotic configurations and old software/hardware, it probably would be out of the question to do something major like a distro upgrade every 6 months. But not every distribution pushes radical changes down the pipe every release, and not every distribution even cares much about releases, like the previously mentioned Gentoo and Arch.
Sure, there is no problem to update your personal network every six month. However, it's quite risky to adopt such schedule in a production environment as there is always a possibility to break something for someone. In this case, I believe it's better stay with the devil you know until there is enough incentive to upgrade, hence why some people might want to stick with older releases.
As for distributions with rolling releases, I cannot count the number of times my system was left broken after an "emerge" or "pacman" on the stable branch. My opinion: these distributons are quite great for hackers wanting the complete control of their system... but I question the sanity (and the accountability) of somebody deploying one of them in a production environment (esp. if it's a desktop deployment)! Of course, YMMV.
Edited 2009-08-27 04:15 UTC
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-06-30
That's a bit off-topic, but...
Depends on your needs. I've got the latest Ubuntu on my personal computers, but we've got the 8.04 LTS at work. It doesn't have all the bells and whistles, but it's a stable target, perfect for large deployments. Upgrading dozens of computers every six months is just out of question.