3 ms·
I specifically said desktop OS for that very reason. I am aware that you can use Ubuntu and get a similar experience, but it's not in the same league as Windows
by hvidgaard 9y ago
I specifically said desktop OS for that very reason. I am aware that you can use Ubuntu and get a similar experience, but it's not in the same league as Windows.
- lmm 9y agoUbuntu is specifically a desktop OS (to the point where I'd say putting Ubuntu on a server is a bad idea), so I don't understand what distinction you're drawing.
- hvidgaard 9y agoMy original comment say > If backwards compatibility is important, Windows is the only sane choice for a desktop os. So I'm not saying anything about a server, for which there is multiple choices of long backward compatibility.
- lmm 9y agoSo what was with your comment about Ubuntu? You seemed to be implying it wasn't a desktop OS but it is. And why are you dismissing FreeBSD, which can perfectly reasonably run on a desktop?