Talking of "too many installers" ...
I've just spent the last *three days* (yes, it really took that long)
performing my once-in-a-blue-moon update to my Billy Box; a marathon
effort involving a visit to about 100 software vendors' websites, as
many reboots, and countless hours attempting to resolve a litany of
software issues. In the end, I gave up and simply restored the system
from a disk image to a known "good" state ... "good" being a comparative
term.
And people ask me why I've turned off Windows automatic updates. Can you
imagine the utter chaos that would ensue if all third party software
under Windows automatically updated? And yet GNU/Linux manages this with
relatively few issues ... certainly none of the thousands of interim
updates that I've applied to my Linux boxes have caused me any problems
for well over a year. The *dist* upgrade to Fedora 8 was a pain, thanks
to overly-aggressive compiler optimisations, but no *regular* updates
had any issues at all.
Naturally those who endorse an OS that has no package management, and no
hope of ever having such a thing, are going to criticise it, but the
reality is that even if there were such a thing for Windows, it would be
an utter disaster ... assuming Windows can be any more of a disaster
than it already is, of course.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| "[Microsoft] are willing to lose money for years and years just to
| make sure that you don't make any money, either." - Bob Cringely.
| - http://blog.businessofsoftware.org/2007/07/cringely-the-un.html
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
04:18:24 up 19 days, 1:54, 5 users, load average: 0.01, 0.05, 0.06
|
|
