From: "Adam Flinton" 


"Rich"  wrote in message news:3e694a6a$1{at}w3.nls.net...
 "  Because linux does have less functionality.  "

In some areas yes. As a blanket statement no. You could show some areas
where windows is ahead & I could show some where Linux is ahead.

"You often find discussions of what it takes to catch up.  The file
systems you mentioned are all very recent and still don't have the
functionality of NTFS which has been in production release for over a
decade.  You don't have to look hard to find discussion of the samba folks
working on catching up to the seven year old Windows NT 4.0.  You already
ignored three times the mention of the lack of ACLs and integrated
security.  Remote management, Active Directory, group policy are more
examples.  Is it really necessary to continue with this?  We haven't even
touched applications.  Before you think of coming back with a mention of
add-on packages, remember that not only aren't these linux, many,
particularly the common ones, are also available for Windows."

Yup but you also find discussions of where linux is to a degree the only
game in town (e.g. large compute clusters for oil comps). Re all the stuff
like ACL'es etc.etc.etc like I said above you could find stuff where
windows "has more functionality" & I could find stuff where
linux "has more functionality". It would be a fairly pointless
exercise. Also I am not the one making statements like "It's well
known windows has less functionality", you are.

In terms of add on packages then take Geo's view that "what's in the
box is the OS" & you would see that you get far more
"OS" for your money with linux (e.g. 2 SQLDB'es, IMAP/POP3/SMTP
server (again possibly more than one) etc.etc.).

I have to say though that having Windows along for the ride is definitely
good for linux e.g. I would hope that what with .Net coming out, most
distribs would include a good 1.3/1.4 JVM & JBOSS &/or Tomcat &
Eclipse / Netbeans.

The problem MS is going to find is that from both a pricing POV & a
legal POV it might not be able to provide the same coverage of server side
processes "in the box".

Anyway. Don't complain about people putting out generalizations which are
so broad that they are patently & demonstrably false & then do the
exact same thing yourself.




Rich

  "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
news:3e69441a$1{at}w3.nls.net...
  Even so the main argument Rich has is that people tend to make broad
  generalizations which are not true partly because of their generalization
  e.g. "linux is more secure than Win2k"

  So then what is  "It's well known that Linux has less functionality" if
not
  the exact thing he is complaining about?

  Adam


  "Geo."  wrote in message
news:3e694080{at}w3.nls.net...
  > "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
  > news:3e692dfe{at}w3.nls.net...
  >
  > > e.g re NTFS How many Journalled File Systems has Windows got? XFS?
JFS?
  > > Ext3? ReiserFS?
  >
  > NTFS has more than all those rolled into one.
  >
  > Geo.
  >
  >

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4