From: gah@netcom.com (Gregg Hungerford) Subject: Re: Coherent vs. Linux - a comparo Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1993 14:32:27 GMT
sct@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Stephen Tweedie) writes:
>Point is, you can't sling mud at Linux for not turning a 4MB 386
>machine into a network news server. There's no need to say "scrap
>Linux, get a *real* machine"; just getting a better PC may be
>sufficient, and Linux will cut it as a power OS.
WHOAH! I didn't sling anything at any os. IF it works for you
that's fine. I've only made a few points and I stick to them. Virtural
memory is great, but really needs a fast disk. I also stated that I
find xterm on a small screen to be a pain in the patoot. That's a
personal opinion. As I stated, I PREFER small screens. My 19" monitors
drive me a little nuts from their imposing size. I also stated that
when people were comparing the costs of linux vs coherent, the cost
of one's time is a factor that was overlooked. The fact that linux
is changing/growing isn't bad and I never said it was.
My opinion of computers and operating sytems is simple. If it works
for you that's great!
Now tell me. When and where did I say 'scrap Linux and get a *real*
machine'? I enjoy an intelligent discussion of operating systems and
computers, but there is no way to have an intelligent discussion if
people are bent on fabricating things like this.
Gregg
--Gregg Hungerford - Boulder Creek, Ca. gah@netcom.com 72115.540@compuserve.com