| Article: |
Switching Back to Desktop Linux | |
| Subject: | Linux vs. OS X | |
| Date: | 2006-06-05 11:54:29 | |
| From: | JayBerringer | |
|
The deal breaker with Linux for me is the amount of time I have to spend to administer the thing: with every security update to the kernel I had to recompile both my wireless and VPN apps. Add to that dual monitor support sort of works if you're willing to tweak X settings (on a laptop), lack of decent APM support (again on a laptop running a 2.4 kernel), no Office (I need this for work and Open Office was a poor substitute, MS Office under Wine was unstable as a Jello mold. Then there are RPM's and dealing with dependencies (or not) when installing an app. I don't see paying $129 for an OS upgrade any different then suffering through myriad Fedora Core releases. Or worse, compiling my own kernel, taking half a day to download the latest KDE or Gnome and having to do that every 6-months or so.
|
||
Showing messages 1 through 1 of 1.



I don't perceive an administration burden greater than I had with Mac OS X (especially when using a distribution that handles package management gracefully), but I am comfortable upgrading configuration files by hand if necessary, so what is acceptable to me might be too technical or complex or burdensome for plenty of other people.