> From: "Geo." 
> "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
> news:b0935a.5a2bcd{at}harborwebs.com...
>> > From my point of view, MS is one group, OSS is another. There, I can
>> > redefine so it works for me. :)
>> 
>> So which group is Oracle in? SAP? Sybase? BEA? etc.etc.
> I didn't say there were only 2 groups.

True. So each proprietary company is a group but the whole of OSS from
Eclipse to BSD to Linux to Apache to JBoss etc are all 1 group?

>> Yup no arg form me there. My problem is not with a direct RH vs Windows
> (as
>> "products" comparison it's the Windows vs
"linux" one where linux can fit
> onto
>> a floppy or onto a set of CD'es/DVD.
> But you are talking in nebulous terms, I'm trying to compare similar
> products like W2K vs RH then you want to say this isn't a fair comparison
> because there is some pocketwatch version of Linux but that can't even be
> compared because it's not even the same type of product.

Neither is the full distrib of a major dist vs windows. Where are the
couple of SLQ db'es, the 3 or 4 Office suites, the compilers, the 5 or 6
GUI'es, the 9 or 10 editors etc.etc. on Windows?

So then if one was to narrow it to "OS'es wot run on a PC" you're
still running the gamut from 5mb to 2-3GB of s/w wrt "linux".

>> The diff between the 2 sizes is the 3'rd party products bundled as part of
> the
>> "product".

> No, the difference is they are totally dissimilar products with one based on
> a subset of the technology in the other. It's like comparing a gas powered
> radio controlled car to a Cadillac 16 because both have an internal
> combustion engine.. Oh look, the technology scales so they are the same..

Not at all. Is a low end el-cheapo car comparable to a medium range or high
range car? They're all cars. I think you'll find if you open a
"Car" magazine you'll see a range of diferrently priced &
equipped models & makes of "car".

>> Indeed. However both are "linux".


> using "linux" in this context is like saying both have an internal
> combustion engine. It's true but it's meaningless.

Hurrah. 

Exactly my point to Rich. He keeps wittering on about "linux"
being insecure or having vulns etc where he means the additons to linux the
distro maker has made most of the time. Like I've said b4 the memmap thing
recently (when I pointed you {at} kernel.org) is a linux vuln. GAIM is not. It
maybe a distro vuln but it ain't a linux vuln.

Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5