On Thu, 28 May 2009 14:42:31 +0200 (CEST) Wojciech Puchar <woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> wrote:
>> 2) Considering FLASH support in FBSD sucks, I find that I regularly >> need > >there are no flash support in FreeBSD as there are no support for >internet explorer or Wojtek's super-ultra-super software (if that >exist ;). It's not FreeBSD job at all, but programmer job of that >software. > >It's an operating system that allow running ANY >programs, with the only requirement to be in FreeBSD ELF format and >using .so libraries and system calls that are in base system. > >Taking into account how simple is to port any program from linux to >FreeBSD, and that Adobe Flash already runs linux, it's simple that >Adobe simply don't want to extends their userbase to FreeBSD for >almost free. > >So as they don't want me to use it, i don't use it. > >If i would consider flash so important to have separate computer for >this, and in the same time accept how Adobe treats me, i will just buy >it. > >But it have nothing to do with FreeBSD support. > >Sorry for long post about it, but i DO HAVE to correct your wrong >statement. Actually, you are a troll. >> the use of a Win PC. There are also numerous applications that I just >> do not have available on an X-desktop. > >What you mean "X desktop"? You mean X Window System? > >> While FBSD has many fine uses, primarily in the server department, it >> is solely lacking as a full service desktop replacement for me. I > >As usual it depends on needs - for me it provides all i need for >operating system. But it's really off-topic Now that is a truly stupid statement. The usefulness of any OS or applications is directly proportionate to the end users intended purpose. >> By the way, using a headless Win PC as a print server takes up >> virtually no space, its power consumption is inconsequential, and I >> am not even > >anyway buing standard-compliant printer seems like simpler and cheaper >solution for me. > >Even if it would be slightly more expensive, i would prefer it, to >keep things simple. First it is "simpler and cheaper' then 'more expensive'. Nothing like a firm commitment to ambiquity. The bottom line is that using a Win PC box for a print server saves me countless hours of frustration. I know that I can purchase virtually any printer on the market today and have it up and running on the Windows box in a few minutes. Can you say the same thing about a FBSD box? Not even close. The idea behind any venture, be it personal or business, is to find the cheapest and most efficient solution for a given problem. I have found one that works just fine for me. -- Jerry ges...@yahoo.com To envision how a 4-processor system running [SunOS] 4.1.x works, think of four kids and one bathroom. John DiMarco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature