Fwd: [Contributors] Microsoft Windows Is Offically Broken

[Guy Fraser]

On Fri, 2005-30-09 at 13:46 -0500, Les Mikesell wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-09-30 at 12:22, Strong wrote:
> 
> > > Every release of RHL was a 
> > > tremendous step forward until 8.0 since then there has been one
> > What was wrong?
> > 
> > > Linux distributions need to get back to their roots if they 
> > > want to survive.
> > What are those roots the Linux went from?
> 
> Someone who feels this way might like RHEL3 or the free Centos3.x
> distribution.  This is based on the 2.4 kernel and stuff that's
> been running for years but still getting timely bugfix and
> security updates.  The roots are still around for people who
> don't like surprises.
> 
It had nothing to do with the 2.6 kernel or frequent updates. It 
had to do with dropping support for many of the command line and 
applications many people used and wanted to continue using. It 
also involved changes to the kernel that made it impossible for 
most people to get some of their applications to compile, which 
is partly why they were dropped by Red Hat. Unfortunately if 
anyone were to build their own kernel, they would then have to 
constantly maintain it, whenever security vulnerabilities were 
discovered. In any case things broke without warning and no 
remedies were provided by Red Hat, the package was just dropped 
in the next release. Many of these packages are still maintained 
and available on other distributions, contrary to many of the 
excuses given at the time.

I can not continue, I feel a rant coming on.