Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DJMaze
This means his version probably has bug and security fixes but it's not for me as developer to force the user to use 3.0 nor 3.4.6.
|
Generally the case is the other way around, at least in my experience. Most dependency checks are based on checking for "at least" version not a nazi rule like "is version".
Seems like you're looking too much into the version numbers, they are fairly arbitrary.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by teknomage1
So I guess the summary of the thread to date
1) Linux is easy enough to use - once configured
2) Administrating Linux is a total bitch?
|
Administration of Linux (or *nix in general) is both a bitch and cakewalk, depending on what you're doing. It's significantly easier to setup a Windows box to be a workstation than a *nix box -- library dependency hell and such will kill *nix setup ease.
For servers, things change up. Depending on the tasks, you'll be going both ways. Active Directory and Exchange are favorites for IT departments who are skilled with both the *nix and Windows variants. However, it'll usually boil down to what they know best.
I have no problem navigating and configuring my FreeBSD: hell, I find it easier to configure and mantain than my Server 2003 box in many cases. Of course, the opposite can be true: it definitely takes much more work to setup a shared folder/network drive in (most) *nixes than in Server 2003. GUI tools and major distributions are working on reaching MS's "Wizard" ease of use.