__/ [ Sinister Midget ] on Wednesday 06 December 2006 14:58 \__
> On 2006-12-06, Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> posted
> something concerning:
>> Unbreakable Linux still unproven, analyst warns
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| IT managers running Red Hat Linux should think carefully before
>>| making the switch to Unbreakable Linux, the new Linux distribution
>>| that Oracle Corp. announced last month.
>> Less reason for Red Hat to worry.
> It was a stupid name anyway.
> However, linux can't be proven to be unbreakable, while Windows is
> known to be broken in dozens of ways. So everybody should do the right
> thing by using the proven product, Windows.
The name "unbreakable" came to suggest that Red hat Enterprise Linux could
break. It was a nasty little jab from Ellison and the gang.
Roy S. Schestowitz | "In hell, treason is the work of angels"
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
roy pts/8 Wed Dec 6 15:32 - 15:32 (00:00)
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine