Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> wrote:

> I think it may be done occasionally. Certainly, if I had contractual
> penalties for downtime, and my choices were Windows or Linux, I'd
> run free software. :P

If I had _that_ choice, I'd not have signed the contract.

Richard

Richard Bos wrote:
> Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> wrote:
>
>> James Kanze wrote:
>>>> Neither Linux nor g++ were even usable, and emacs (by
>> That's pure fantasy.
>>
>> I used a couple of Linux distributions in the early nineties, and they worked
>> better than commercial UNIX variants.
>
> You're mad. I used Solaris to run an Informix database system not ten
> years ago, and I would not have run it on Linux for the world. The
> business depended on that thing: no database, no newspaper. Linux was
> simply Not An Option. That system's successor is run by someone else,
> but apparently he (or rather, they) agree with me: it's Oracle, not
> Informix, but still running on Sun systems.
> The FTP server, meanwhile, ran on Linux. That was fine, for that
> purpose. But don't come to me saying that it's better than the
> commercial alternatives.
>
>> I used emacs and knew many who used vi back then. They were solid.
>
> Yeah, but have you ever used an _editor_? No, a real one?
>
> Richard


--
Lew

Lew wrote:
>> I used emacs and knew many who used vi back then. They were solid.

Richard Bos wrote:
> Yeah, but have you ever used an _editor_? No, a real one?

Sure. emacs and vi. They're real, or are you suggesting I was hallucinating?
For that matter, MS Notepad is a real editor. I certainly would never
imagine such a one if I could help it. My chisel works real well on pebbles
for cuneiform editing, too.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor_war>

Nice try.

--
Lew