Re: A better Linux/OS?
- From: Bit Twister <BitTwister@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 20 Jul 2007 01:20:38 GMT
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:31:32 GMT, Lee A. Wentzel wrote:
But come on... to the person who asked what I meant by "stable". As I
am not a farmer, I was referring to programs running smoothly and not
crashing.
See, it depends on where you stand. One stable definition would be "not
much program churn." Program churn causes more regression testing to
verify new program does not impact users.
On a distribution that it is cutting edge, you would see lots of
program change/upgrades/churn. Now you are stuck with new feature/control
change and new learning experience for the user.
But, it is stable according to your definition because the programs
are not crashing.
As to flexibility, I guess that is a good question. What I like about
Ubuntu is the Add/Remove program option. I have found a number of
wonderful applications as well as some stinkers there. Yes... I
probably could have stumbled up on on Sourceforge, and after some reading
and work, manage to get up and running, but the beauty was, I didn't have
to struggle. It was made easy.
See, there again, all the major distributions have an easy user
interface for package maintenance.
Flexibility to me is, use package manager, or pull some kind of
archive file from anywhere, and get it up and running with little
hassle. That does not match your definition of flexibility because you
would not know how to manage a make file for install of a non package
manager managed package.
.
- References:
- A better Linux/OS?
- From: Lee A. Wentzel
- Re: A better Linux/OS?
- From: Lee A. Wentzel
- A better Linux/OS?
- Prev by Date: Re: A better Linux/OS?
- Next by Date: Re: Ok, another (annoying?) question . . .
- Previous by thread: Re: A better Linux/OS?
- Next by thread: Re: A better Linux/OS?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|
