Originally Posted by
kermit
The guys who don't like Linux come with things like "Linux is less compatible." That is funny - I would bet money that Linux runs on more systems than Windows does. If you say that there is software that won't run on Linux that will run on Windows, fine - I will give you that, but really, is that a fault of Linux? Has it got anything to do at all with Linux being a crappy OS? If a software company codes something that works on Windows, and does not give support for Linux, whose fault is it if it does not work on Linux? I mean seriously, if there was some app that only ran on Apple computers, would you bash Windows because it couldn't run it?
Or maybe the "incompatible" talk refers to hardware - like wifi and such. Still a no go - if the vendor of the hardware makes no driver for Linux, whose fault is it that it won't run? I don't get mad if I buy something with hardware that does not work on Linux. If I bought it without knowing whether or not it was supported on Linux, then I have to eat it. If I want to be sure it is supported I buy stuff that I know works. Such is the case with my computers at this time.
As an aside, I am kind of glad some things are not compatible with Linux. I bought an HP computer with Windows 7, and I am sick and tired of the nagware put on there by HP and Norton (again, this is not the fault of Microsoft - at least not directly) that I actually hate booting into Windows. The only reason I use Windows is to run Dragon Naturally Speaking - now that Nuance makes a dictation product for Macs, I see no reason to keep a Windows install around at all.
Now if some of you people like Windows, thats great. I have no problem with that, but don't go bashing Linux guys because it is the cool thing to be anti-Linux.