3 ms·
My 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
by hvidgaard 9y ago
My 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?