[Wolves] I just read this....

[Peter Cannon]

On Friday 02 June 2006 11:03, Kevanf1 wrote:

>  On the other hand, other
> distro's just might support a piece of hardware that the others don't
> and besides, it's plain good fun on a none production machine to try
> out something different.

Heres the rub, if all we had was Windows, would we be dual booting W95/98/NT 
etc? or have three or four bases running different versions of Windows?

I often wonder if its not just a case of "the grass is greener" If I had the 
skills I suppose I could get any app to run on any release and if like me you 
like eye candy then its possible to have three flavours of distribution that 
all look the exactly the same so at the end of the day whats the point? for 
example I have Kontact-->Kmail/kde-PIM on SuSE and Fedora also Amarok on 
both.

Both apps are duplicated with the same content, Fedora-KMail leaves it on the 
server SuSE-->KMail cleans it off but at the end of the day its still a 
duplication. I generally use the same apps over and over again so why run
Fedora, SuSE, Ubuntu and DSL? Wouldn't it be easier to just run one and really 
learn the ins and outs of it rather than being a "Jack of all trades master 
of none"? (Thats a rhetorical question by the way)

I think the defining factor is who? and what? you are are. If you are just a 
standard user messing about for fun then I reckon you only need one, on the 
other hand if your a sysadmin then you need to know the different flavours 
theres nothing worse that being a skilled RH man and on your 1st day finding 
a bank of Debian Servers I know the principles are the same but you get my 
drift.

-- 
Regards
Peter Cannon
"There is every excuse for not knowing
there is no excuse for not asking"