> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael R. Jinks [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 11:02 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: OT: The Truth: Server Shipments in Y2K
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Also, since we're talking aggregates and versions, should
> we not be breaking
> > down the Linux numbers by distribution in the same way the
> windows stat was
> > broken out by version?
>
> I don't think so. There are cross-distro compatibility issues, sure,
> but in my experience they haven't mattered very much.
>
> If I did want to break out the stats into distros, I'm not
> sure how I'd
> do it; many of today's well-known distributions are Red Hat-derived;
> should they be "less separate" than Red Hat vs. Debian vs. Slackware?
> Does KRUD count as a distro?
Granted. But could you not make the same case for W2K? That it is
NT-derived? That's Microsoft's claim, anyway.
Just so you know, I'm not trying to give you a hard time. I am playing a
little devil's advocate to refine pro-Linux arguments such as yours so that
I can use them too :).
Regards,
Rob
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
