Joined: Oct. 2003
||Posted: May 26 2008,02:09
I don't usually read reviews. But I think the comment from joer about using a review machine based on the target of the distro is good.
It seemed long ago to me, that the closer a distro looks like windows, operaters like windows, and feels like windows, the better the review. Forget "what's inside" its only the windows feel and eye candy that matters in reviews.
I believe we are the only 2.4 based system currently being actively maintained. Therefore any future reviews will only be more negative as future newest level hardware becomes the reviewer test machine.
Here is another caetgory that should be included. How well does the current release support prior releases or are the releases like a flavor-of-the-month. All prior versions become obsolete? Do they make their users dump everything they had in order to use the newest version?
Gosh, I dread if one of these guys tries to review tiny core. Therefore, let me now pubically proclaim:
1. Do not review DSL v3.x or 4.x unless the target review machine is circa kernel 2.4. We are NOT kernel 2.6.
2. Do not compare 2.4 kernel versions vs kernel 2.6 versions. It doesn't make sense.
3. Please don't review the upcomming tiny core. It is NOT a desktop. It does not look like Windows and has absolutley no eye candy.
Now watch, I will probably be called a *nix elitist.