>>>Linux user no doubt.... ? It speaks for itself that you have a dozen or
> so
>>>programs that do the same thing - not one of them good enough to do
>>>everything?
>>Well, sure, lots of programs will do "everything." I still get to
>>choose which one.
> But because no one program does everything you want,
Note false premise: using multiple programs to enjoy this or that
"'feature.'" We're just posting stuff on usenet, not embedding
animations or who knows what. Today I feel like using Mozilla for
posting. Maybe tomorrow I'll wish to try something else, just for
novelty and fun.
Your remark reminds me, instead, of the debate (loosely enough defined)
on Photoshop versus GIMP. Some say that GIMP lacks enough features,
such that one must supplement it, if using it at all.
Now, if I needed e-mail and a nice calendar at the same time, I might
prefer Evolu ... (oops, scroll down)
We were just talking about it ...
Why didn't you say so? It's a great wide world out there, as well you know.
Of course, one would point to Evolution as exemplifying the all-in-one
approach, something that opens e-mail, lets you look at the calendar,
tells the weather wherever (Who cares? How much harm could it do?),
suggests surfing to salon.com (time-wasting but fun, like what we're
doing right now), and so forth.
(Not clear, whether this compares Evolution to Outlook, or Red Hat to
Windows XP.)
> which does almost every(but one)thing I need from a
That's logically sturdy, but heuristically suspect. (Or, as we said to
our friend with the new Mac: "At least Microsoft doesn't make it; how
bad could it be?")
But, granted, it's pretty hard to play games, in Windows, and post to
the newsgroups, in Linux, at the same time. I couldn't much disagree
with shutting down Red Hat and booting Windows for that. Sometimes
those fancy games are fun, too. Somehow I did wander into one of these
newsgroups.