On May 8, 10:07*am, chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> joel garry wrote:
> >I've come to the opinion that linux as sold/supported is a toy OS
> >running on toy hardware,
>
> Yeah, that's why countless corporations and research organizations use
> and depend on it. *Tell google that Linux is a "toy OS".
>
> Idiot.

Well, I may be an idiot, but what does it say that even more
corporations use Windows? (Too avoid confusion: I'm biased against
Windows and for unix. A decade ago I was very pro-linux in cola.).
It says that countless corporations are wrong, to me. Success in the
marketplace does not mean technical superiority, and often means the
converse.

We all ought to know the history - some smart guy wanted to know how
386's worked. Getting from there to a professional OS? I say it is
arguable. Any time someone can point out something major where
Windows works better, first of all... (I have hardware detection and
support in mind as I write this, certainly the main reason I'm no
longer using linux, specifically redhat, I have 3 dozen versions of
different linux in shelfware, at least.).

Now as far as linux/Oracle, you need to address concerns like these:
http://groups.google.com/group/comp....ce2fc3536fe0b4

You see, I'm a _sophisticated_ idiot.

I think the Oracle stand (referenced by the OP) of a single linux is
just plain wrong, even limiting to the db sphere there's wildly
different needs and usages.

jg
--
@home.com is bogus.
So, do people die if your software doesn't work right?
http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnis...448331-sun.php