At work, FreeBSD and Solaris are present. For some fields of use, I would not FreeBSD instead of Solaris. However, I found
isn't the reason to using solaris just the need to run solaris-only binary software?
no operating system that could replace FreeBSD in the fields where I use it. As in many other topics, this is only my very individual point of view. I do see "FreeBSD's problems" in most cases where hardware support isn't up to date, but that's mainly a thing of the hardware manufactureres that (a) build black boxes or (b) do not use existing standards, so accessing their hardware is a problem. Other problems are usual entertainment stuff that seems to hook that deeply into the operating system that it leads into problems - yes, I'm talking about "Flash" especially.
exactly. as adobe don't want me (FreeBSD) user use flash, i do not.
Hardware vendors are mostly interested in operating systems that already have a huge market share. Allthough FreeBSD is a very professional OS and has a growing usage share, its market share isn't that big, so it is considered to be
even more - FreeBSD users needs MUCH less processing power to do the same than for example - windows user.
so even less computers need to be bought.
Personally, I'd prefer an OS that supports a narrow subset of hardware excellently and efficiently instead of an OS that claims to support everything, supports most things poorly
me too. _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"