From: "Paul Ranson" 

I'm obviously looking at it from a general purpose pov. Why would you bring
up embedded applications? Do you know what the Sky+ OS is?

Paul

"Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
news:3dc84bfe$1{at}w3.nls.net...
> hummm...it depends. If what **you** want is stable then it is. 2 examples:
>
> The Sky+ box & the Tivo.
>
> People ain't gonna do apt-get on their sky+ box.
>
> Adam
>
> "Paul Ranson"  wrote in message
news:3dc82384{at}w3.nls.net...
> > The point is stability. Linux isn't anything like feature complete yet
so
> > stability isn't an option.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > "Adam Flinton"  wrote in message
> > news:3dc81cb8{at}w3.nls.net...
> > > Nope. The average user can sign up to something like a "Windows
update"
> in
> > > just the same way. Some dists will prefer to go latest &
greatest &
some
> > > will go for stability (i.e. security patches only).
> > >
> > > e.g the Corp version of Red Hat works with 18 month release cycles.
> > >
> > > The point is choice. With Windows whether you don't want any upgrades
> for
> > 2
> > > years or every 6 months you have no choice in the matter. With Linux
per
> > se
> > > you can look at say Debian if you want stability vs say Mandrake if
you
> > want
> > > latest & greatest. What is more if the dist decides on an 18 month
> release
> > > cycle they still gain all the advantages of the other distribs
releasing
> &
> > > building code etc.
> > >
> > > Adam
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > "David N. Barnett"  wrote in message
> > > news:gs4gsu0rf0lla0h30f703l9blha6g960ko{at}4ax.com...
> > > > On Tue, 5 Nov 2002 15:53:12 -0000, "Adam Flinton"
> > > >  wrote in message
:
> > > >
> > > > | 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.....
> > > >
> > > > This is what will continue to scare the average punter away from
Linux
> > > > and toward the known-quantity monopoly OS.
> > > >
> > > > --dnb
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

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