Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Chris Ahlstrom Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: Do Microsoft?s Copilot+ PCs Require Linux? Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 07:11:31 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 19 Message-ID: References: <9s645j1pehkhdkc7kjj3hbp2nnu93c4mfc@4ax.com> <66523fb2$0$1258345$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> Reply-To: OFeem1987@teleworm.us Injection-Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 13:11:31 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3b13b446919fd3f0b1dcb7fa6636dba7"; logging-data="1755958"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/9SopGuPiWtWf/jK+0m7je" User-Agent: slrn/1.0.3 (Linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:dmC/MkuAqCBqgiwoR2PUrAvGnOc= X-Mutt: The most widely-used MUA X-Slrn: Why use anything else? X-User-Agent: Microsoft Outl00k, Usenet K00k Editions Bytes: 2459 Andrzej Matuch wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > > > Whether D'Oliveiro wants to admit it or not, Windows 2000 and XP both > looked like professional operating systems when they were released, and > they had a polished look which is often sorely lacking from Linux > desktop environments. Aside from Ubuntu which always manages to make > GNOME look great, the desktop environment of choice in most > distributions always has elements which simply don't look right. It's > still a fantastic environment which allows you to do every job you can > think of and more very effectively, but there is no reason to criticize > the way that any version of Windows has looked when the current crop of > Linux desktop environments don't look better at all. Opinions are like assholes... everyone has one. -- You will soon forget this.