Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 24 Jan 1997 00:39:11 +0100 | From | Alessandro Suardi <> | Subject | Re: Good point of Linux over Windows NT |
| |
Robert Krawitz wrote: > > In article <32E699B8.72B3D251@uninetcom.it> Alessandro Suardi <asuardi@uninetcom.it> writes: > > Corporate users want to be able to scream "we are paying for your OS > so run and give us what we ask", they don't want to have to explain to > their top managers that Linus had a baby and he could not fix the bug > in the Linux kernel yesterday. > > That doesn't mean that commercial software vendors will actually fix > the bug at all, much less in any reasonable amount of time. > > The motto is "if something goes wrong the folks who gave me the OS are > responsible for that", which will never be true on Linux. > > Responsibility does not equate with actually doing anything. > Microsoft may be responsible for bugs in Windows; does that mean that > they'll actually do anything about it if you're not a significant > revenue source for them?
hmm, this is not the first response which appears to assume I am trying to show the good in "corp users'" mindset.
Those people are braindead. But actually for that reason there is not a single hope to wake their neurons. If they believe NT can be a server OS for serious reasons, it's over. I dare supposing that even a massive project failure could only result in them firing their own tech people. Unless somebody fires them Linux won't have any way through. And IMHO a vast majority of top managers is too technically unskilled to take the right decisions.
I asked for a port of Oracle8 to Linux, if this can tell anything. Never got any reply from US. 'nuff said.
BTW may 1100 NT servers (sigh) be a "significant revenue source" ?
--alessandro <asuardi@uninetcom.it> <asuardi@it.oracle.com>
Linux-i386 kernel-2.1.21 libc-5.4.17 gcc-2.7.2.1 binutils-2.7.0.3
| |