XPost: alt.comp.os.windows-11, comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.sys.mac.advocacy   
   From: ldo@nz.invalid   
      
   On Thu, 20 Nov 2025 10:47:22 +0000, J. P. Gilliver wrote:   
      
   > To return to the analogy: would you say that the various OSs could   
   > be compared to the three types of car ...   
      
   If Apple and Microsoft made cars, they would have entirely different   
   driving systems, need different kinds of fuel, and have to be driven   
   each on its own set of roads. Switching is not something you could do   
   easily.   
      
   Even worse, if you decided to switch, you might even have to   
   *untravel* some of the miles you’d already done, and do them again in   
   the new car.   
      
   By contrast, Linux offers a thousand different models of cars -- more   
   than the Apple and Microsoft worlds put together. And they come in a   
   bewildering range of colours, sizes, seat and door layouts etc. But   
   they all drive in pretty much the same say, use the same fuel, and   
   operate on the same roads. So switching is something you can do very   
   easily.   
      
   But people coming from the Apple or Microsoft worlds still complain   
   about why we need so many choices: why can’t the Linux world be more   
   like the Apple and Microsoft worlds, with more limited choices? Who   
   needs so many kinds of cars? Didn’t you know, having too much choice   
   is “unsustainable” -- whatever that means?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)