Linked by Howard Fosdick on Mon 22nd Oct 2012 04:51 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 539613
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.
RE[2]: Actually.... fragmentation is not good
by Jason Bourne on Mon 22nd Oct 2012 21:32
in reply to "RE: Actually.... fragmentation is not good"
I started using Linux in 1999, with Red Hat 5.2. I tried Slackware. At that time, popular systems like Windows 98 were full of constant crashes and instability not to mention the Win32 applications. We were thirsty for the whole idea of Linux and a total free new userspace. Of course there were already GNU tools but just laid anonymous in Unix systems. It was basically Red Hat that made this achievement to push Linux towards enthusiasts.
Microsoft learned how to battle its virtual competitors, and linux desktop developers have learned recently how to shoot in their foot right on time of a major shift. (Hello GNOME 3 and Unity!)
Edited 2012-10-22 21:33 UTC
RE[2]: Actually.... fragmentation is not good
by Luminair on Mon 22nd Oct 2012 22:53
in reply to "RE: Actually.... fragmentation is not good"
RE[3]: Actually.... fragmentation is not good
by Jason Bourne on Tue 23rd Oct 2012 00:09
in reply to "RE[2]: Actually.... fragmentation is not good"





Member since:
2005-07-06
It's only a problem if one particularly cares about market share. A significant portion of us don't. I know I didn't start with slackware all those ages ago because I cared about Linux/FOSS taking over the world. It just happened to be a fun toy that later evolved into a seriously useful set of tools.