Mirrors my thoughts exactly, just wished I could have said itWhen my web-cam, USB-wifi, or printer doesn't work on some version of Windows, it's a problem with the web-cam, the USB-wifi or the printer;
When my web-cam, USB-wifi, or printer doesn't work on some version of Linux, it's a problem with Linux. -- Can you say "double standard"?
I've been using Linux for a dozen years -- and I'm just a used-books dealer. My friends all have problems with Windows (less since Vista/7, but still more than I have with Linux). Windows isn't ready for the average desktop user. -- Can you say "double standard"?
Firefox, Opera and Chrome can cope, HP and Brother printers/multifunction can cope, various games can cope. Wall Street stock markets and traders can cope. Even Hollywood can cope. Heck, even Broadcom could cope, once they realised they were losing sales by pretending Linux was too hard. I suggest the problem is less some supposed "lack of standardization" and more a combination of inertia and accumulated bad, OS-dependent code. -- "Works with Windows (version X, but not version Y)" isn't "standardization either.
I keep hearing this, but as far as I can tell, when all is said and done, complaints about unstable APIs are just a roundabout way of saying that OEMs aren't used to it / that that's not how Microsoft does it.
Most complaints about Linux boil down to "it's a Windows world -- give up and just use Windows".