Contridiction in users logic:

Location: East Coast Occupation: Consultant

They need more restriction that is for sure. Hey I do not get where everyone is calling Bill a republican and all that crap. I'm a republician sitting here hoping M$ is broke up or has something done to them. You people are silly to say 'oh its cause bush was elected' or 'cause Cheney met with so and so' that stuff has nothing to do with the M$ junk. From a Republican. Break up M$ put a stop to their stuff. Oh yes and let me state here (as i've been accused of this in the past) I am not a Linux user nor ever have been. I run Win98.

- -

Does't the above sound like flawed logic. One one hand, he dislikes Microsoft, or, as he comically calls it 'M$', however, he makes the problem worse by running Windows.

This lad needs to learn, if you talk the talk, walk the walk. All very well bad mouthing Microsoft and calling it immature names such as 'MS$' and 'Mafiasoft', which is a grave insult to the Mafia, yet, Howard makes the situation worse by still using Windows and using Microsoft products.

I don't use Linux because I like the fluffy penguin, or because it is opensource, but because it is superior what Microsoft offers. Unlike JSPL, I have used a several OS's over serveral different archectures, and each one I have used, when compared to WIndows, is superior in every aspect. Reliability, stability, scalability and secuirty.

Why do people use it? simple, 90% of users are morons unwilling to read a bloody book and learn.

Matthew Gardiner

I'm nearly in the same boat as you. But I use Linux primarily because of ethical reasons. I simply can't see supporting a company that has lied, cheated, bullied, extorted, and thieved their way to prosperity.

Secondly, I use Linux because the technology is superior, and it breeds 'true' innovation, not the routine theft of intellectual property that Redmond misrepresents as innovation. Security and stability, certainly. Cost is dead last on my list; I just spent as much money on a box of goodies from SuSE as I would have spent on WinXP. There just simply is no camparison between the two; functionality wins out over 'cutesy' in my book anytime.

I get that a lot at work, from a clicque of Linux-bashers whose dead tree collection from Microsoft Press occupies twelve feet of shelf space. 'We don't have time to read all that Linux manpage stuff'. Yet they've got time to read a quarter-million pages of Windows crap.

Go figure.

Then why support Linux? Doing so supports IBM, who has done not only everything you claim, but also crimes against humanity by supplying tabulation machines to the Nazi's for use in concentration camps.

Fact is, IBM is worse than MS by a long shot. They have had senior executives convicted of bribery and collusion.

Breeds true innovation? Name *ONE* thing Linux has innovated. Just one.

It sounds like you're using Linux for reasons which aren't true.

: cheated, bullied, extorted, and thieved their way to prosperity.

Nearly EVERY large company does that.

: Secondly, I use Linux because the technology is superior, and it breeds : 'true' innovation, not the routine theft of intellectual property that : Redmond misrepresents as innovation. Security and stability, certainly. : Cost is dead last on my list; I just spent as much money on a box of : goodies from SuSE as I would have spent on WinXP. There just simply is no : camparison between the two; functionality wins out over 'cutesy' in my : book anytime.

Cost was how I got into Linux at the start. Your other reasons I found later but make perfect sense, alas.

: I get that a lot at work, from a clicque of Linux-bashers whose dead tree : collection from Microsoft Press occupies twelve feet of shelf space. 'We : don't have time to read all that Linux manpage stuff'. Yet they've got : time to read a quarter-million pages of Windows crap.

The man pages sometimes help but not always, surely for a newbie. Linux is an acquired taste, at least on the home desktop. Imagine a Windows user meeting up with my CLI Linux home desktop. Just the way I like it. (: For normal people.... OUCH! It's the antithesis of Windows. X is fine, but I don't care. I like my CLI.

I'll grant you that this isn't exactly software that the ordinary user would want, but has Microsoft come up with anything even remotely similar to Beowulf?

The Viet Cong were particularly adept at using unexploded American munitions to rig booby traps. So we should sue ourselves for providing technology to the North Vietnamese that enabled them to kill us?

Your argument is so far out in left field even the Hague declined to pursue it. I might as well sue the Wright brothers for my uncle getting shot down over Ploesti during WWII. After all, by your reasoning, they created the technology that got his ass killed.

Creating technology or indirectly contributing to something is not the same as deliberately selling a product to someone with the knowledge of its use.

But I really don't want to get into this argument. My point was simply that supporting Linux also supports the behavior you claimed to not want to

Thriving for 100% open standards compliance. A great innovation compared to the Microsoft mantara of 'embrace and extend to enhance functionality for our customers'.

Linux also thrives for maximum interoperability between platforms, even with Windows. Compare that to Microsoft code-changing-and-openstandards-modifying-o-thon that happens each time a service pack is released to fix 'problems'.

Matthew Gardiner

Bullshit. BSD has been doing that for 20 years.

Again, BSD has been doing that for 20 years.

What? That supporting linux supports IBM? That's not false. It most certainly is true. IBM is taking all your Linux hard work and is reaping profits from it on the sale of their hardware.

No, I'm stating that the ethics argument is bogus.

Are you a moron?

I know. That's what so cool.

: What's your favourite shell?

The C Shell.