[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Questions for anti-.0 folks...

I'm not an anti .0 guy, and I'm still unauthoritatively new to Linux in
general, and I dunno whether ppl will change their minds about 8.1 now
that it is called 9.0, but I've had troubles with 8.1 itself.  I realize
it's a beta, but generally I have fixed a few major compatibility
problems (other than nVidia) with sound cards, network cards, and
motherboards by just installing a 2.4.18 kernel.  I think the
new-kernel-with-new-version theory holds some water.

8.0 works perfectly every time on everything, tho.  ;-)

Personally, I kinda wonder if the version change is at least a little
bit affected by everyone else having higher numbers.  Remember IE 4, IE
5, IE 5.5?  Of course, Netscape had 4.0, 4.01, 4.02, 4.5, 4.76,etc ...
up to 4.8 in about the same span of time.  Then they jumped straight to
6.  What happened to 5?

Of course, I have no problem if this actually has anything to do with
the versioning scheme.  (Hmm, Evolution doesn't like the word
"versioning"...it's probably right.)  In Linux, a new version is just
another well-tested package of various versions of software with some
fixes, doodads, and proprietary software added.

Maybe people are still reeling from MS days, when higher major version
numbers always meant worse software.

95a, scary
95b, much better

98, very scary
98SE, much better (though still scary)

Millennium, [expletive deleted]

That could explain the fear surrounding new versions of software.

Phoebe-list mailing list

[Home]     [Kernel List]     [Red Hat Install]     [Red Hat Watch List]     [DVD Store]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

Powered by Linux