10 Jan
2012
10 Jan
'12
3:19 a.m.
On Jan 10, 2012 6:55 AM, "Mouse" <mouse at rodents-montreal.org> wrote:
If you are unable to distinguish between not reflexively bashing
Windows based on out-of-date perceptions of it and being a Windows
fanboy...well, then, I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but in
that case you deserve at least some of the epithets thrown your way.
Not that I like Windows. I don't. It's a horrible, horrible OS in
multiple respects for almost every purpose I care about.
What he said!
I dislike Windows myself these days & try to avoid it. I can use it,
support it & work with it if I have to, but I won't if I don't have too our
are not being paid to.
Even so, for all its faults, modern versions are highly reliable. Anyone
flaming about how unreliable it is immediately *shows themselves to be an
irrational non,MS fanboy* because such opinions are not based upon current
facts; they are bigotry, based only on prejudice & badly out-of-date
hearsay.
If I am paying someone for technical advice and skills, I expect a current
skill set of all major platforms. For some things, the right tool may be
one that somebody does not personally like. They should be able to suggest
this without their emotion and preferences getting in the way.
If they can't, then they are unfit for the job.
That means current knowledge and no bigotry and hatred.
Then
perhaps Dave you should keep out of the conversation - your
above comment shows you are still stuck in the 90's and have no
comprehension of current technology whatsoever. As a manager of
various Solaris, Linux and Windows servers for one of Australia's
largest banks, I find very, very little difference in the
reliability, performance and uptime of any of them.
I'm "stuck in the
90s" because I'm not a Windows fanboy??