Linonut wrote:
> You left out your time. Linux is free only if your time is free.
Well the install process may take between 5 and 40 minutes, depending on
the hardware and package choices, but most of that time is non
-interactive, which means I'm not spending time on the install per se.
I can (and do) go off and do other things.
Also, the "time" argument is equally applicable to Windows, only more so
given it's extraordinarily high unreliability; utter lack of any package
management; and obfuscated workings that require what amounts to hacking
in order to maintain the system when it all inevitably goes wrong. Where
hacking proves too difficult or unsuccessful (e.g. because of Malware),
then third-party tools need to be purchased and installed, further
adding to the wasted time and money.
Of course that isn't to say that Linux is entirely trouble-free, but in
the grand scheme of things, the Windows XPerience is much more time
consuming; expensive; and generally painful:
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=5MVfOTtD6B0
The choice of Free Software is not only a political one, but obviously
one made for practical reasons too, as the above video demonstrates.
> You see, Microsoft would have you count as money the time you spent
> installing Linux, when you could instead have been jacking off.
They seem to have grossly underestimated the value of Freedom, not to
mention my free time.
--
K.
http://slated.org
.----
| 'When it comes to knowledge, "ownership" just doesn't make sense'
| ~ Cory Doctorow, The Guardian. http://tinyurl.com/22bgx8
`----
Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.23.8-63.fc8
00:12:59 up 75 days, 21:48, 4 users, load average: 0.03, 0.07, 0.02
|
|
