Re: Linux vs. Windows
On Wed, 29 Jul 1998, Tom Pfeifer wrote:
> These days, Linux being hard to install is true only in the sense that
> almost everyone installing it is starting out with something like Win95
> already on their machine. That immediately causes problems like setting
> up a dual boot and partitioning to crop up - and these are problems that
> are not unique to installing Linux.
> If you had two equally intelligent/skilled people, gave one a Debian CD
> and the other a Win98 CD, and then gave each of them identically
> equipped new machines with reasonably mainstream hardware and a blank
> hard drive, I doubt that one would have significantly more trouble than
> the other in getting up and running.
> It's what comes after the install that is harder in Linux - there's no
> doubt about that. But speaking for myself, after a bit of a struggle
> getting started, it has been well worth the effort. Linux isn't for
> everyone though - and was never intended to be.
Not for long. Debian 2.0 was much easier to install than 1.3.
Agree? With the presence of whiptail and slang in the base install, I
think more and more windoze refugees like me (was) will find Debian
quite easy to install. Even for non-technical people.
/\ Richard L. Alhama, Technical Support
,,'' \/ Cyberspace Laoag,ISP
"Overuse of the smiley is a mark of loserhood!" --The Jargon File
Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe firstname.lastname@example.org < /dev/null