On Tue, 2003-06-24 at 12:38, MWafkowski wrote: > > But I've looked pretty stupid in the past when a customer/friend/relative > was curious about Linux as a desktop OS and I would jump in with great > fervor extolling the virtues of desktop Linux only to have them say - "This > is slow as hell; why did my browser (Mozilla) just stop working; this looks > like crap; why do different programs use different keystrokes, etc, etc. > etc. > > If a customer now asks me about "upgrading" to Linux on his network of Win > 98 desktop PCs (usually 500-800 Mhz CPU, four meg video, 128 megs ram > "legacy boxes) I would consider myself irresponsible if I didn't tell them > that unless they were willing to dump the old hardware and start over, we'll > add another 128 meg ram and install XP.
Im not so sure of that, my Celeron 500mHz w/ 256mb RAM ran RH8 very well. Load times for KDE werent good, but Gnome 2 was very nice. > > Most "regular" folk don't want "adventures in computing". They want PCs to > do work with with a minimum of hassle. KDE or Gnome on Linux is not that. > > Peace, > Mike Wafkowski > I agree with you there Mike, but things are getting better. I have also seen friends et al frown upon my linux offerings, but the bottom line is that things are getting better, slowly but surely. I must say that I have more confidence than ever, that Linux *will* be ready for the desktop ( anyone's ) in about 3-5 years time. Just keep your advocacy up, and the linux will follow. ;) Cheers, Ryan -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
