From: "Rich" 

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_01E7_01C2E4D2.244BD5D0
Content-Type: text/plain;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

   Because linux does have less functionality.  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.

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.
  >
  >


------=_NextPart_000_01E7_01C2E4D2.244BD5D0
Content-Type: text/html;
        charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable








   Because
linux does have =
less=20
functionality.  You often find discussions of what it takes to = catch=20
up.  The file systems you mentioned are all very recent and still = don't=20
have the functionality of NTFS which has been in production release for = over a=20
decade.  You don't have to look hard to find discussion of the =
samba folks=20
working on catching up to the seven year old Windows NT 4.0.  You
= already=20
ignored three times the mention of the lack of ACLs and integrated=20
security.  Remote management, Active Directory, group policy are =
more=20
examples.  Is it really necessary to continue with this? 
We = haven't=20
even touched applications.  Before you think of coming back with a
= mention=20
of add-on packages, remember that not only aren't these linux, many,=20
particularly the common ones, are also available for =
Windows.
 
Rich
 

  "Adam Flinton" <adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>">mailto:adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com">adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>
=
wrote in=20
  message news:3e69441a$1{at}w3.nls.net...Even=20
  so the main argument Rich has is that people tend to make=20
  broadgeneralizations which are not true partly because of their=20
  generalizatione.g. "linux is more secure than
Win2k"So =
then what=20
  is  "It's well known that Linux has less functionality" if =
notthe=20
  exact thing he is complaining
about?Adam"Geo."
=
<georger{at}nls.net>">mailto:georger{at}nls.net">georger{at}nls.net>
wrote in =
message news:3e694080{at}w3.nls.net...>=
 "Adam=20
  Flinton" <adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>">mailto:adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com">adam{at}NOSPAMsoftfab.com>
=
wrote in=20
  message> news:3e692dfe{at}w3.nls.net...>=
>=20
  > e.g re NTFS How many Journalled File Systems has Windows got? =
XFS?=20
  JFS?> > Ext3?
ReiserFS?>> NTFS has more than =
all those=20
  rolled into one.>>=20
Geo.>>

------=_NextPart_000_01E7_01C2E4D2.244BD5D0--

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