A bit of nerdiness
Peruse linux forums and you find a lot of people (rightly) extolling the virtues of GNU/Linux as a more stable OS than Windows....and then you see those same people getting their systems hopelessly broken by running bleeding-edge code which hasn't been properly debugged or tested yet.
I mean, more power to 'em for offering their workstations up as test beds for the community, but it's gotten me thinking about how many people go to GNU/Linux (any distribution) and then attempt to go with THE most current code possible...and end up with systems even less stable and useable than MS.
Not that I'm saying that everybody should be runnign Debian Woody--that distro is stable, but three years old--but it just amuses me to think that we've been conditioned to deal with hoplessly broken systems enough that people are actually actively seeking to put their systems into that state.
I mean, more power to 'em for offering their workstations up as test beds for the community, but it's gotten me thinking about how many people go to GNU/Linux (any distribution) and then attempt to go with THE most current code possible...and end up with systems even less stable and useable than MS.
Not that I'm saying that everybody should be runnign Debian Woody--that distro is stable, but three years old--but it just amuses me to think that we've been conditioned to deal with hoplessly broken systems enough that people are actually actively seeking to put their systems into that state.