Steve R.
Retired
- Local time
- Today, 12:32
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2006
- Messages
- 4,617
Obviously, one should should question anything written by a pundit. The problem that I am complaining about is that some of the pundits are just plain superficial.
Recently I ran across an article that appeared interesting: An Excess of Operating Systems as it raised a valid concern. Developing all these operating systems are an exercise in reinventing the wheel.
What "turned-me-off" to the article, was that Linux was not appropriately discussed, despite the fact that the Linux penguin and the Ubuntu icons were displayed in the article. The article merely states: "In the PC era, the players were Windows and macOS; for mobile devices, we have Android and iOS ...". While the statement is "true", it overlooks Linux as a viable alternative. And a problem with Linux is that there are a (unnecessary) plethora of "flavors". That plethora of "flavors" was something I was expecting that article to get into. It didn't.
A while back I ran across this post on a Windows forum. Microsoft Office vs OpenOffice vs LibreOffice: Which one is better?. The forum supports the Windows operation system. So naturally it is not surprising that the post supported Microsoft Office. Nothing wrong with that. However, it did not appear that the author of this post made any real effort to compare the various office suites. The "big" give-away for this assertion is that the OpenOffice suite appears "dead" (in the sense that continued development is not active). Surprising that the author missed this tidbit.
Recently I ran across an article that appeared interesting: An Excess of Operating Systems as it raised a valid concern. Developing all these operating systems are an exercise in reinventing the wheel.
What "turned-me-off" to the article, was that Linux was not appropriately discussed, despite the fact that the Linux penguin and the Ubuntu icons were displayed in the article. The article merely states: "In the PC era, the players were Windows and macOS; for mobile devices, we have Android and iOS ...". While the statement is "true", it overlooks Linux as a viable alternative. And a problem with Linux is that there are a (unnecessary) plethora of "flavors". That plethora of "flavors" was something I was expecting that article to get into. It didn't.
A while back I ran across this post on a Windows forum. Microsoft Office vs OpenOffice vs LibreOffice: Which one is better?. The forum supports the Windows operation system. So naturally it is not surprising that the post supported Microsoft Office. Nothing wrong with that. However, it did not appear that the author of this post made any real effort to compare the various office suites. The "big" give-away for this assertion is that the OpenOffice suite appears "dead" (in the sense that continued development is not active). Surprising that the author missed this tidbit.