[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > John Bokma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> "David Schwartz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > >> > "Tim Roberts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> >> Part of their behavior really escape me. The whole thing about >> >> browser wars confuses me. Web browsers represent a zero billion >> >> dollar a year market. Why would you risk anything to own it? >> > >> > It really isn't that hard to understand that web-based >> > applications that work in any browser on any OS threaten >> > to make it irrelevent what OS you're running. >> >> And it's even easier to understand that your statement is nonsense. >> >> It doesn't matter which Linux distribution you pick, all use the >> Linux kernel. On all I can run OpenOffice, and get the same results. >> Yet people seem to prefer one distribution over one other. > > He was talking about the browser war, and gave a pretty good reason > why it was important. So you respond by pointing out that people > choose a linux distribution for personal (non-technical, > non-marketing) reasons. I think I missed the connection.
web based applications that work with any browser make OS irrelevant -> not true, since for OpenOffice it doesn't matter which Linux distribution one runs (or even if it's Linux), yet people seem to make a point of which distribution they use. >> > MS has a strong interest in making sure it's important >> > to be running on one of their OSes. >> >> Maybe *they* do have a point :-). > > Which is? That it *does* matter. It doesn't matter which brand makes your graphics card, since most stick close to the reference design of the GPU chip supplier, yet people take the brand in consideration when they buy. -- John Small Perl scripts: http://johnbokma.com/perl/ Perl programmer available: http://castleamber.com/ I ploink googlegroups.com :-) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
