To the Editor:
Most of what your article "Microsoft's pesky rival," had to say about Linux was true -- it is more stable than Windows systems, and it is believed by many (including myself) to be the "future" of operating systems. However, I take issue with two points. One was that "the [Linux] interface is a poor substitute for Windows." Actually, the Windows interface lacks basic functionality that Linux has, such as a convenient mechanism for searching the contents of the system's files for key words. Moreover, with regard to the graphical user interface, there are recent developments for the Linux system which contradict your assertion. I am currently using a seamless and easily configurable desktop manager provided on the Red Hat Linux installation CD-ROM. Secondly, your characterization of some Linux advocates as "rabid" in their hatred of Microsoft begs the question: "Who's rabid?" Is it the company whose name has become synonymous with industrial coercion, or is it the individual developer who believes passionately that there is a better way to produce software that gives people more than the illusion of choice?
Andy C. Deck