> "Our documentation doesn't have to be accurate, we'll just call you stupid when it doesn't work for you."
so, do BSD devs take the trouble to properly document their software because they got too much time on their hands?
btw, if you read the quote carefully you would note that their is an implicit heirarchy in the linux camp. namely: the developers are like god and users are treated like lowly mortals. BSD dev's generally are a _lot_ less pretentious.
there is a lot of other BS too associated with linux.
currently, i am using centos and debian, and i have to admit that i found centos to be very stable and all the *nix software just works.
IMO, centos is a lot like MS windows - its just a platform to run your software, nevermind that the OS itself is mediocre, uninteresting and overly complicated.
linux has its advantages: its free/open source, 'similiar enough' to unix to be able to compete with it, and very popular thanks to the massive hype and PR engine behind it. but i suspect that if one looks beneath the pretty gui exterior its still a mess.
phew! i have never written a post this big.
(note to linuxers: no hard feelings, this is just my opinion and its probably not even worth 2 cents.
)