In article <hvr0u4-ekq.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > What was said at the time is that 'Computer God' (Mossberg) tends to slam
> > everything other than Apple and what brought criticism was the fact that he
> > criticised Ubuntu for not handling an iPo^H^H^H^Hd the way he expected or
> > wanted.
> >
>
> Interesting that he had a poke at Cola, though. Clearly, we're rather
> more widely read than some folk imagine.
Mossberg didn't have a poke at COLA. He didn't even mention COLA. It was
the article *about* Mossberg that mentioned COLA. What it said was:
So, should we be crying foul? Should we be accusing The Goatberg of
FUDMeistery? Write a few thousand lines of foaming at the mouth
invective on comp.os.linux.advocacy and hang Mossberg in effigy?
No, because the Goatberg speaks the truth. What he says about lots
of complications and hassles and workarounds gets to the real heart
of the problem with desktop Linux adoption. As early adopters and
power users, we are willing to deal with these problems in order to
benefit from Linux's greater reliability and performance. But the
reality is the majority of end users would have extreme difficulty
in migrating to a current Linux desktop without lots of extra help
from a skilled IT professional, and even then he still might not be
able to completely adapt.
--
--Tim Smith
|
|
