Social Contract WAS: distributions: UBUNTU vs DEBIAN
Chris Lale wrote:
Andrew Sackville-West wrote:
On Sat, Apr 22, 2006 at 05:15:06PM -0500, Kent West wrote:
Include my name in the list of "people for whom social contract is the
#1 point" also. When Debian ceases to be Free, then Debian ceases to
retain my loyalty.
--
Kent
>>
1 more here.
A
And another.
For me, an OS is a means to load applications. Debian was the
choice due to ease of install, ease of hardware detection,
and ease of making it work with some Windows machines.
The decision was based on running several LiveCD versions of
Linux, and picking Knoppix as the winner[1]. Since it is based
on Debian, Debian was the choice.
"Social contract" machts nichts here. In fact, for me, the
"social contract" aspect of all Linux distros is a drawback
to them. I don't want to "change the social order" or "be
the downfall of capitalism", or "kill MicroSoft" or any of
the other "social goals" so often associated with Linux. I
just want a cheap and reliable OS to load my apps. Unfortunately,
that means that getting support means wading through sometimes
annoying amounts of "social contract" trash to get to the good
stuff.
[1] Kanotix was a very close second, and in some ways better,
but it is also Debian based, so we didn't go farther in trying
to decide which was the "real" winner.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
Reply to: