From: "Paul Ranson" 

Loads of different distributions of more or less the same thing is bad. IMO.

I want to load a PC with an OS and have that be that. Patches as necessary.
But not effectively  a new OS every few months. And managing 'upgrade'
strategies simply won't happen, there aren't the resources for the required
testing. You have to assume that as Linux extends its reach the average
user gets dumber.

Perhaps there's a future for the Hurd model. I rather like that, although I
haven't tried loading it yet.

Paul

"Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
news:3dc7e809{at}w3.nls.net...
> What I like about this (& will reward with my custom) are those distribs
> which make sure that all the improvements go back into the pot.
>
> I don't reckon MS have a hope with their single OS of keeping pace with
what
> 5-10 good distribs all releasing at different times etc but sharing the
same
> base....
>
> Distrib A does well on this but poorly on this so...all the other distribs
> nick the good bits & work on the poor bits etc.etc. & then
release so that
> their distrib B does well on this but poorly on this so.....all the other
> distribs nick the good bits & work on the poor bits etc.etc. & then
release
> so that their distrib C does well on this but poorly on this so.....all
the
> other distribs nick the good bits & work on the poor bits etc.etc.
& then
> release so that their distrib D does well on this but poorly on this
> so.....all the other distribs nick the good bits & work on the poor bits
> etc.etc. & then release so that their distrib E does well on this but
poorly
> on this so.....all the other distribs nick the good bits & work on the
poor
> bits etc.etc. & then release so that their distrib F does well on this but
> poorly on this so.....all the other distribs nick the good bits & work on
> the poor bits etc.etc. & then release so that their distrib G does well on
> this but poorly on this so.....all the other distribs nick the good bits &
> work on the poor bits etc.etc. & then release so that their distrib H does
> well on this but poorly on this so.....all the other distribs nick the
good
> bits & work on the poor bits etc.etc. & then release so that
their distrib
I
> does well on this but poorly on this so.....all the other distribs nick
the
> good bits & work on the poor bits etc.etc. & then release so that their
> distrib A does well on this but poorly on this so.....
>
> etc.etc.etc.
>
> That is simply not possible with a single OS (no matter if OSS or closed
> source). If there were multiple FreeBSD distributors then FreeBSD (or
"A"
> Free BSD)  might be able to keep up....but w/o the number of different
> distribs.....
>
> Adam
>
> "Robert Comer"  wrote in message
> news:3dc7d117$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> > Let us know how it does -- I've been interested in that one for awhile
but
> > don't want to pay for it just yet.
> >
> > I'm pretty anxious to see what SUSE comes out with in their desktop
> version
> > later on too...
> >
> > - Bob Comer
> >
> >
> > "Joe Barr"  wrote in message
> > news:3dc7b990$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> > >
> > > Could be right.  I'm going to try the Xandros distro today.  Who
knows,
> it
> > > might be sooner than you think.
> > >
> > > See ya,
> > > Joe Barr
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, 05 Nov 2002 10:49:46 +0000, Adam Flinton wrote:
> > >
> > > > So lets see....how many distribs are now getting to the
"good
/useable
> > on
> > > > a desktop" state....
> > > >
> > > > e.g
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
>
http://www.zdnet.com.au/builder/program/work/story/0,2000034960,20269602,00.
> > > > htm
> > > >
> > > > I reckoned 2 releases before Linux would be ready for
the desktop /
> > > > actually start pulling ahead of windows.
> > > >
> > > > Adam
> > > >
> > > > "Joe Barr" 
wrote in message
> > > > news:3dc71ada$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> http://www.linuxworld.com/site-stories/2002/1104.barr.html
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > >
> > > --
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

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