--- On Wed, 10/8/08, Billy Crook [email protected] wrote:
Yes, Linux is better/faster than windows. No, old crap isn't the right place to show it. Most people don't care what runs on old hardware, and I find it rather repugnant to hear people say "Oh yeah, Linux, that's the thing you put on old computers, right?" No. Stop it. Buy a brand new machine with Linux on it.
So because you want to make people stop saying "Linux, thats the thing you put on old computers?", you're willing to adopt the stance of Microsoft and demand that all users of a modern OS buy new computers?
No, I have no apologies for refusing to do Microsoft's work for them and kill off Linux by helping to *erase* its advantages over Windows. Windows is so big and bloated, and gets so much bigger with each new incarnation, that you have to buy a new computer to run a new version of Windows.
Linux can run on modern quad-core processors, but you can strip it down to run on a 486 (like DamnSmallLinux and DeLi Linux have already done) without erasing its ability to be a desktop system. There are versions of embedded Linux which will run on XT and 286 CPUs. If a friend gives you an old computer made in the past 19 years (the Intel i486DX CPU (the very first 486 CPU) was shipped in 1989), I guarantee you can put a useful version of Linux on it, and if the computer was made in the last 10 years (1998+, possibly even earlier) you will probably be able to put a modern version of Linux on it. Microsoft cannot come anywhere near this claim, especially as they were a major reason (with the release of Windows 95) for 486s being dropped in favor of Pentiums.
Microsoft Windows has discontinued support and security patches for Windows98, meaning that Windows98 cannot be used to resurrect old hardware as Windows98 is now obsolete, unlike the hardware it ran on. Windows XP Professional will run out of support and security patches in less than 5 years, making it an identical type of OS as Windows98: an OS which cannot be used to resurrect old hardware because it is scheduled to DIE in less than five years.
Linux has no such limitation. Linux will continue to live and thrive because it is geared towards growing and living, rather than scheduled product death. The hardware Linux runs on remains a wide selection, rather than Windows' limited "made in the last few years" selection. Linux's source code remains open, allowing code from older versions to be improved for modern uses (if improvement is even needed). Linux's memory management means the same computer runs Linux faster and more stable than Windows (no new computer upgrade required for an increase in speed and stability). These are all advantages Linux has over Windows which need to be /celebrated/, not demonized.
The correct response to "Linux, isn't that what you put on old computers?", IS /NOT/ "No, Linux is no different from Microsoft Windows/Vista in that you need to buy a new computer to run Linux."
The correct response is "No, Linux is what you put on ANY computer."