3 ms·

>My experience and some of my friends' experience is that Linux is quite unreliable. Microsoft is really unreliable but Linux is worse. In a non-PC environment,

by batista 14y ago

>My experience and some of my friends' experience is that Linux is quite unreliable. Microsoft is really unreliable but Linux is worse. In a non-PC environment, it just won't hold up. If you're using it on a single box, that's one thing. But if you want to use Linux in firewalls, gateways, embedded systems, and so on, it has a long way to go. Huh? Linux _IS_ used in servers, embedded devices, gateways, firewalls, cellphones, what have you... What exactly is "unreliable" about it, except a very vague accusation?

SG- 14y ago
in 1999 Linux wasn't really used for big production, but sometime around then the .com/linux bubble happened with a lot of companies selling/using linux as their main product (VALinux/Akamai/Redhat/many others).
eckyptang 14y ago
I was still using Sun/Solaris machines back in '99 when this was written, which were considerably more reliable from an every day use perspective. Most of the negative comments and opinion came from people who'd worked with industrial grade kit and moved to cheap PCs with Linux on. To be honest, if you go back that far, Windows NT 4 on Compaq Professional Workstations was probably the most reliable thing out there believe it or not so I'm not sure where the hell these comments came from.