[Wolves] Linux vs Windows 7

[DragonMaster]

> DragonMaster wrote:
>
> Now you see this raises an interesting question
>> "The main reason for using
>> Linux is that <everything> comes in the box, there are very few extras
>> that need to be located these days for a 'standard' machine beit desktop
>> or server, and that is a big boost for a tinkerer like me.
> If this was MS I.e. W7 and it came with Office, SBS blah blah blah
> bundled would we all be up in arms?
> I'm thinking in terms of the court cases and the fact IE is bundled?
>
> See for me it begs the question everyone wants MS to not be allowed to
> bundle a browser yet install a KDE based distro and you have  Konqueror
> by default. Now I understand that you can un-install Konqueror with
> minimal damage (It will break some things) but IE is way too tied in but
> it still smacks of double standards to me but then I always was
> controversial ;-)
>

Ah, but the difference here is that MS is inherenly tied to a single
browser rather than offering a choice.  But this is a specific example. 
Where I was coming from was that on the distribution cd/DVD/respository
you will find pretty well everything that a user will need - graphic,
sound, development packages et-al.  And they are all included in the
price.

  Compare that with MS, and you are tied to paying for software (fair
enough if it works and is good value for money) or you take your chance
on the freeware sites.  Now I'm probably being naive, but I feel that if
the 'standard' apt or rpm repositories have software available, the
chances of there being malicious components are going to be low as a
result of the number of competant hackers out there who will be going
through the code minutely - fixing any bugs, or removing bits that
<shouldn't> be there...