Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 14:25 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 03:02:28PM -0500, Jerry wrote: > > On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:32:59 +0100 (CET) > > Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > > >NVidia MUST INCLUDE full documentation of their hardware. > > >this is normal - hardware manufacturer produces hardware, programmers > > >do make support for it. > > > > > >what is common today isn't normal. > > > > I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here. > > I think he's trying to say that open source drivers would be preferable, > and to develop them we'd need the hardware specs so we'd have a target > toward which to develop drivers. Of course, "preferable" is my choice of > term -- he seems to be more of the opinion that anything that isn't > strictly open source should just be shunned, out of hand. While it would > be nice if that was a practical option, it isn't really, at this point. > Perhaps he'd be more at home in the Fedora community which are adamant about that too... :P > > > > > NVidia produces both the hardware and drivers for same. It requested > > additions/changes to the basic FBSD system to enable their product to be > > fully functional. Changes that it seems other manufacturers would also > > need. > > At least four things need to be clarified: > > 1. Would the requested changes have a negative effect on system design > in some way? > > 2. Would working on making those changes divert important resources > from other, perhaps more important, projects? > > 3. Are the changes the same as what other hardware vendors would need > before they could fully support FreeBSD, or are they different -- > possibly even contradictory? If the latter, we need to consider > whether such contradictions can be worked around without degrading the > stability and performance characteristics of the system, and see what > impact such work-arounds would have on the answer to question 2. > > 4. Is there any way we can talk them into helping us work on fully > functional open source drivers, as AMD (which bought ATI) has promised > to do for the Linux community? > > I don't know the answers to any of those four questions -- in part > because discussion never gets past the "No! You'll destroy FreeBSD if > you try to support that hardware!" stage of discussion. > > > > > > Now, if FBSD has no intention of working with other hardware and/or > > software manufacturers/authors, maybe it should just post a big "KEEP > > OUT" sign on its web page. > > > > I seriously doubt that NVidia, or any other manufacturer is about to > > divulge trade secrets or patented information. What point would there > > be in that anyway? It is certainly not necessary. What developer in > > his/her right mind would be interested in making their product usable > > on a FBSD system if they knew that they would have to divulge all of > > their trade secrets, etc. > > Actually, patents are publicly documented by definition -- we're just not > *allowed* to use it, once it has been patented, without permission. The > sort of thing they don't want to divulge is trade secrets, which you > meantioned -- not patents, which you also mentioned. For some reason, > though, some hardware vendors seem inclined to use patents as an excuse > for keeping secrets, which never made much sense to me. > > IANAL, though I read about the law from time to time. Ok, so moving forward on this point: How exactly does this help in developing drivers for FreeBSD? Patents are ideas- right? So wouldn't this mean that it would still require "guessing" and estimation of what should happen and how to do it? You also mention that they're publicly accessible- how? Whats the portal and how would you search for required device? I ask this not just in reference to NVidia (which has dominated the discussion) but to other devices as well. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 20:04 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > than not you discourage beginners from getting interested in this > > i don't discourage beginners that want to learn. > > Most of them don't. You remind me of a tech I once worked with who thought all customers were stupid. Maybe they were... The boss sent him to customer relations training sessions. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Saturday 13 December 2008 20:10:56 Robert Huff wrote: > prad writes: > > > We have a fantastic postmaster, who is single-handedly managing dozens > > > of mailing lists, replying to posts about email problems for the > > > entire *.FreeBSD.org domain, and making sure that we get as little > > > spam as possible. That sort of service that is so good and so > > > transparent that it is _very_ easy to forget how useful and thankless > > > it is. > > > > very true! i've been surprised at the low spam ratio here for > > sure! we all owe a debt of gratitude to this postmaster. > > Well, yes. On the other hand, spamming a mailing list full of > computer geeks - crochety and otherwise - is about as productive as > trying to rob a bar full of police. > > > Robert Huff > > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Will this thread possibly stop before new years eve perhaps? It is already gearing to another issue!. I didn't count but I believe it has reached over 30 and I can't stand deleting it anymore. pleeease stop ! Thanks -- Mario Lobo http://www.mallavoodoo.com.br FreeBSD since version 2.2.8 [not Pro-Audio YET!!] (99,7% winedows FREE) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
A lot of times I report spam anymore and usually the domain gets kicked off or I help a company with some information in their investigation usually. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
prad writes: > > We have a fantastic postmaster, who is single-handedly managing dozens > > of mailing lists, replying to posts about email problems for the > > entire *.FreeBSD.org domain, and making sure that we get as little > > spam as possible. That sort of service that is so good and so > > transparent that it is _very_ easy to forget how useful and thankless > > it is. > > very true! i've been surprised at the low spam ratio here for > sure! we all owe a debt of gratitude to this postmaster. Well, yes. On the other hand, spamming a mailing list full of computer geeks - crochety and otherwise - is about as productive as trying to rob a bar full of police. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
spam as possible. That sort of service that is so good and so transparent that it is _very_ easy to forget how useful and thankless it is. very true! i've been surprised at the low spam ratio here for sure! we all owe a debt of gratitude to this postmaster. every time i get worried seeing a spam on FreeBSD mailing list, i quickly think about how many spams DOES NOT get here :) We seem to be doing quite fine without moderation so far. that's pretty cool and certainly says something about the quality of people on this list. the abrasive stuff is minimal as compared to other lists i've been on too. the truth that other lists (like other unices, linux) are worse (yes, they are) doesn't mean that this list can't be improved. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 23:04:43 +0200 Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > We have a fantastic postmaster, who is single-handedly managing dozens > of mailing lists, replying to posts about email problems for the > entire *.FreeBSD.org domain, and making sure that we get as little > spam as possible. That sort of service that is so good and so > transparent that it is _very_ easy to forget how useful and thankless > it is. > very true! i've been surprised at the low spam ratio here for sure! we all owe a debt of gratitude to this postmaster. > We seem to be doing quite fine without moderation so far. > that's pretty cool and certainly says something about the quality of people on this list. the abrasive stuff is minimal as compared to other lists i've been on too. thanks for the info. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Wojciech Puchar wrote: freebsd-c...@? >>> >>> indeed. with this and other non-freebsd topics >> >> You, yourself, spawn this kind of digression into off-topicness every now >> and then. Perhaps *you* should reserve some of *your* comments for >> freebsd-chat, too. > > And certainly will AFTER such offtopic discussion won't be appearing here. > > i mean such offtopic discussion like: > > - comparision of things that can't be compared, and are not FreeBSD > specific, like "what is better windoze or KDE" > I have yet to see a topic on questions@ regarding windows vs KDE. > - how to make is KDE/Gnome - it's not FreeBSD > specific, of course we can answer how to do it without KDE/Gnome :) > I agree with this, to a point. That's what freebsd-kde@, freebsd-gnome@ are for, but sometimes questions are too generalized, and end up here. > - "When there will be 64-bit Nvidia Xorg support" - ask NVidia or Xorg team. > It's not part of FreeBSD > It is, indirectly. Although the FreeBSD developers shouldn't be responsible for this kind of thing, they most probably have more direct contact and "inside information" with these type of vendors. > > after there will be stopped, i will stop complaining Doubtful. -- Glen Barber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 12:26:21 -0800, prad wrote: > anyone know if there are moderators for this list? > > i know there are some very nice people who keep watch. once i messaged > the test list with a ports question (i was having trouble emailing this > one - so i was testing to see if there was some problem in general), > and a very considerate person from freebsd.org, Remko Lodder, emailed > me asking if i knew that i was emailing the test list. No, we don't have moderators on freebsd-questions. We have a fantastic postmaster, who is single-handedly managing dozens of mailing lists, replying to posts about email problems for the entire *.FreeBSD.org domain, and making sure that we get as little spam as possible. That sort of service that is so good and so transparent that it is _very_ easy to forget how useful and thankless it is. We seem to be doing quite fine without moderation so far. We even advertise freebsd-questions as the main "contact point for questions about FreeBSD" on release notes, our web site, and on the CD-ROM or DVD-ROM images sold by FreeBSD distributors like FreeBSD-Mall. There are very good reasons to keep this status quo. I have yet to see *one* good reason for introducing moderation. > i found it really decent that people look out for others here! Yes, that's the spirit :-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
you're reply to another post: If you wish you can call me "fuhrer" ;) but iwth Gestapo you certainly got too far. :D good response to that unfortunate eruption of enthusiasm. i think it's a problem of fear about past consorship in many countries. But this is completely different things. Moderation is not censorship like that, as EVERYONE can create it's own mailing lists :) moderation would definitely not be a bad thing in some situations! and exactly is needed on that group. it would be enough that moderator's job will be just removing posts that classify to NTG. NOTHING else. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:38:29 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: > It's nice people like to help other people, but it's bad it helps > them on that lists with OFF-TOPIC problems. > agreed! i think these illustrations you present are relevant: >- comparision of things that can't be compared, and are not FreeBSD >specific, like "what is better windoze or KDE" > i think questions like this come as a result of the asker not knowing the landscape (which is certainly forgivable) or just wanting a quick answer without wanting to understand anything (which is not). more appropriate - how is freebsd better than windoze? btw, just in case anyone is interested this is the page that got to go to freebsd way back when: http://people.freebsd.org/%7Emurray/bsd_flier.html (don't know how accurate it is now, but it is a comparison of freebsd, linux and win2000) i've travelled around a fair bit with both bsds and linuxes, but came back to freebsd. >- "When there will be 64-bit Nvidia Xorg support" - ask NVidia or Xorg >team. It's not part of FreeBSD > i would think a question like this would be asked by people who don't understand the mechanisms involved specifically that freebsd doesn't provide the drivers and that it is unreasonable to expect the already generous developers to reverse engineer something like this. > i don't mean moderation like removing one opinions and not others. > agreed. that would be unreasonable censorship. you're reply to another post: > If you wish you can call me "fuhrer" ;) but iwth Gestapo you certainly > got too far. > :D good response to that unfortunate eruption of enthusiasm. moderation would definitely not be a bad thing in some situations! -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
team. It's not part of FreeBSD after there will be stopped, i will stop complaining Better yet, start your own list. Then you can play the roles of führer and Gestapo all to your own liking. i am not FreeBSD owner/creator. If i would sell a product/service that would need mailing list for support i will certainly do this, so that list will support my product, not others, and to remove mess and offtopic threads. If you wish you can call me "fuhrer" ;) but iwth Gestapo you certainly got too far. Please control your words more.___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 21:04:08 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: >And certainly will AFTER such offtopic discussion won't be appearing >here. > >i mean such offtopic discussion like: > >- comparision of things that can't be compared, and are not FreeBSD >specific, like "what is better windoze or KDE" > >- how to make is KDE/Gnome - it's not FreeBSD >specific, of course we can answer how to do it without KDE/Gnome :) > >- "When there will be 64-bit Nvidia Xorg support" - ask NVidia or Xorg >team. It's not part of FreeBSD > > >after there will be stopped, i will stop complaining Better yet, start your own list. Then you can play the roles of führer and Gestapo all to your own liking. -- Jerry ges...@yahoo.com For an idea to be fashionable is ominous, since it must afterwards be always old-fashioned. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
probably that they would create "competitors" somehow, magically, without providing any information that directly encourages competition for their hardware. If they wanted to provide per-incident paid software support or simply charge people extra for drivers, *then* I could see this being a problem, but I haven't seen a whole lot of that kind of rent-seeking behavior from graphics adapter vendors. i don't see any problem. There is a product - for example Nvidia powersuckers^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hfull 3D accellerators. Their can this, that, blah, blah and blah, they don't have FreeBSD support. There are other products, they can this that blah blah and have FreeBSD support. You need blah blah and blah under FreeBSD, you don't buy nvidia. end of topic. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Except Flash support depends (/inter alia/) on the Linux emulation layer, which has been accepted as part of the "FreeBSD developers" job. Indeed, I get the feeling Flash is sort of a quiet flash runs under linux emulation with linux binary browsers. what a problem? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
good illustrative examples, chad! i think moderation has value if it is done reasonably. for instance, it all depends if FreeBSD has to be treated as public projects or somehow private. I'm not talking about open/closed source as it's opensource, but it's private as there are well defined core team+developers, not random people. without moderation it's a mess. It's nice people like to help other people, but it's bad it helps them on that lists with OFF-TOPIC problems. i don't mean moderation like removing one opinions and not others. But removing off-topic messages, that are 95% now or more. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 12:43:02 -0700 Chad Perrin wrote: > I'll > provide a technical example, as opposed to a social example, so maybe > you'll be able to understand my point ... > good illustrative examples, chad! i think moderation has value if it is done reasonably. for instance, people who talk about foreign currency values on a freebsd list should be watched very closely. woj made a good point in another post i think in that he's happy helping beginners who really do wish to learn. i know i've come across some who think the world owes them everything and make ridiculous demands on a list (not to mention ot posts - and they aren't even trying to sell you anything!). however, in general i like giorgos' comment the best that he was helped a decade ago and he's returning that favor. so in that respect, i agree with your 'false positives' concern - innocent till proven guilty! anyone know if there are moderators for this list? i know there are some very nice people who keep watch. once i messaged the test list with a ports question (i was having trouble emailing this one - so i was testing to see if there was some problem in general), and a very considerate person from freebsd.org, Remko Lodder, emailed me asking if i knew that i was emailing the test list. i found it really decent that people look out for others here! -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Wojciech Puchar writes: > so stop asking on FreeBSD group about flash support. it's not > FreeBSD developers job. Except Flash support depends (/inter alia/) on the Linux emulation layer, which has been accepted as part of the "FreeBSD developers" job. Indeed, I get the feeling Flash is sort of a quiet proxy for the general health of a number of less well known but nonetheless useful bits and pieces. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 08:37:09AM -0800, Charlie Kester wrote: > On Sat 13 Dec 2008 at 01:44:03 PST Chad Perrin wrote: > > > >I rather suspect that a much stronger, and more common, reason for > >obstinate refusal to open specs is the short-sightedness and general > >ignorance of daycoders and pointy-haired bosses -- all of whom think Java > >is the best programming language around because that's what "most" > >programmers use and have some vague, unsupported (but stubborn) notion > >that secrets are good for business. At least it *seems* they all think > >so. > > There's no need to impute any insidious or lazy motive to them. If they > can sell their product without documenting any API's, they will tend to > do so, as a way of cutting costs and thus increasing their profits. What about that isn't either insidious or lazy? > > As for their "obstinate refusal", I think they often have a reasonable > fear that if they do provide documentation, it will create an ongoing > demand for support. No matter how much effort you put into > documentation, there always seem to be some questions you haven't > answered, and people will be pestering you for the answers. More costs! > But once you've opened the door by publishing the documentation, it's > hard to close it gracefully. So they probably figure it's better to > just say no at the outset. I think that fear is, in fact, *unreasonable*. I also don't think it's the only unreasonable fear they have -- and that the bigger fear is probably that they would create "competitors" somehow, magically, without providing any information that directly encourages competition for their hardware. If they wanted to provide per-incident paid software support or simply charge people extra for drivers, *then* I could see this being a problem, but I haven't seen a whole lot of that kind of rent-seeking behavior from graphics adapter vendors. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Albert Camus: "An intellectual is someone whose mind watches itself." pgp3HR6kYv0wc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:46:55AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>>I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here. > >> > >>exactly what i wrote. the problem is that people like You (and millions > >>others) are willing to buy product without any documentation. > > > >You may find this surprising, but sometimes circumstances lead people to > >make purchases of "total package" products rather than building something > > there are products for them. In other words, your answer seems to be: "We don't want users who like FreeBSD, but want to use it on a laptop. FreeBSD should never be used on a laptop." I'd say I can safely ignore you, knowing that's your attitude, if it weren't for the fact that a lot of other people won't know that down the line, and you may permanently damage the FreeBSD project by chasing off potential contributors. Is there any way I can get you to stop being such a contentious trojan horse of an enemy to the FreeBSD project? -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] They always say that when life gives you lemons you should make lemonade. I always wonder -- isn't the lemonade going to suck if life doesn't give you any sugar? pgps0kWIWROek.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
freebsd-c...@? indeed. with this and other non-freebsd topics You, yourself, spawn this kind of digression into off-topicness every now and then. Perhaps *you* should reserve some of *your* comments for freebsd-chat, too. And certainly will AFTER such offtopic discussion won't be appearing here. i mean such offtopic discussion like: - comparision of things that can't be compared, and are not FreeBSD specific, like "what is better windoze or KDE" - how to make is KDE/Gnome - it's not FreeBSD specific, of course we can answer how to do it without KDE/Gnome :) - "When there will be 64-bit Nvidia Xorg support" - ask NVidia or Xorg team. It's not part of FreeBSD after there will be stopped, i will stop complaining ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
bad (TM). No -- at *any* level: you are wrong. for example you WILL like to control what oficially your employees ktalk about your company. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 01:48:02PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > >>To unsubscribe, send any mail to > >>"freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > >> > >I think too much of this discussion is OT, maybe it's time to go in > >freebsd-c...@? > > indeed. with this and other non-freebsd topics You, yourself, spawn this kind of digression into off-topicness every now and then. Perhaps *you* should reserve some of *your* comments for freebsd-chat, too. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Mike Maples, as quoted by James Gleick: "My job is to get a fair share of the software applications market, and to me that's 100 percent." pgpHgDE3lWFMC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:33:40AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> > >>that's why it would be good to finally introduce moderation on that list - > >>to cut off 95% of traffic that is not about FreeBSD. > > > >Moderation, like all bureaucracy and oversight, a chainsaw -- not a > >scalpel. One should always be wary of its use where even the slightest > >error might result in significant loss of value. > > you may be right. moderation (censorship) on country or so level is just > bad (TM). No -- at *any* level: Moderation is, like all bureaucracy and oversight, a chainsaw -- not a scalpel. One should always be wary of its use where even the slightest error might result in significant loss of value. I'm not saying moderation is always bad. I'm saying one should always be wary of it were error can result in damage to overall value. I'll provide a technical example, as opposed to a social example, so maybe you'll be able to understand my point. When creating firewall rules, the logical and safe way to do it is to first deny all traffic, then create rules to specificallfy allow only the traffic you want -- in the general case, at least. If and when you run across need for something else to be allowed through, add it to the exceptions to the default deny policy. False positives (i.e., things that are denied entry or exit through the firewall) are generally not a big problem, because you can just change the ruleset and try again. When creating spam filter rules, priorities are a little different. In the general case, if you have a default deny policy with exception-based rulesets, you will suffer significant problems. This is because false positives can be much more damaging to your priorities, since receiving an email is not something you can just "try again" in many cases. Important emails may be sent unsolicited, and you may never know they were sent if you don't receive them because your spam filter was overzealous in its identification of emails. It is because of this elevated level of damage caused by false positives in spam filtering that third-party blacklists and strict heuristic spam identification can prove quite suboptimal. Introducing a heuristic filter to a mailing list -- and human moderation is exactly that: a heuristic filter -- can cause the same kind of problem with false positives as a heuristic filter for personal email spam management. > > and what i ask is not to just dump out people asking about "what's program > like photoshop for FreeBSD", but creating list group for that > (freebsd-softw...@... or freebsd-progr...@...) and redirecting them > there! Actually, my take on the list name "freebsd-questions" is that it's for "howto" questions related to FreeBSD -- not that it's specifically, and only, for "questions about the FreeBSD Base System". In much the same manner that there are a lot of mailing lists for "questions about Linux" that deal with much more than just the Linux kernel, I don't think anyone in a position to make such demands of the community has clarified "questions about FreeBSD" to be limited, in intent, to "questions about the FreeBSD Base System". I look at the freebsd-questions information page: http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions . . . and I don't see anything saying "If your question does not pertain directly, and solely, to the Base System, you should not ask it on this list." In fact, if that *was* the rule, this list would probably only get something like two questions in a five month period on average. Most of them would just be repeats, probably mostly related to how to use csup. Is that what you want -- a list so restrictive and low-traffic as to be almost pointless? > > and leave freebsd-questions for QUESTIONS ABOUT FREEBSD As far as I can tell, that's *exactly* what this list is -- if you assume FreeBSD is more than the Base System, and includes things like the peripheral projects associated with it, and its users. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Naguib Mahfouz: "You can tell whether a man is clever by his answers. You can tell whether a man is wise by his questions." pgpCNvTivB7gH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 20:06:39 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> under windows, but runs under - say - MacOS. > > > > In the hypothetical scenario that I would be a Mac user who is happy > > with his MacOS application, why would I want to bother with > > Microsoft at all? > > In the non-hypotethical scenario of You being windows user happy with > flash in browsers (or maybe linux - doesn't matter), why do you > bother FreeBSD users about it at all?! > > you exactly confirmed what i said > i don't see how your comment applies. giorgos addressed the 2 scenarios A. happy with os1 app, not bother with os2 B. happy with os2, but likes a os1 app so wants to have it ported or find equivalent. i think giorgos is saying that we have scenario B (while your non-hypothetical is really A) where happy fbsd user would like some other os1 app. i don't see anything wrong with that despite my personal feelings about flash. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
under windows, but runs under - say - MacOS. In the hypothetical scenario that I would be a Mac user who is happy with his MacOS application, why would I want to bother with Microsoft at all? In the non-hypotethical scenario of You being windows user happy with flash in browsers (or maybe linux - doesn't matter), why do you bother FreeBSD users about it at all?! you exactly confirmed what i said ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
than not you discourage beginners from getting interested in this i don't discourage beginners that want to learn. Most of them don't. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Hi, >> I don't see the difference. If a program runs on FreeBSD it runs on >> FreeBSD, so it _is_ something that FreeBSD users may be interested in >> for their every day work. Does it really matter if the particular piece >> of software also runs on AmigaOS? Not really, IMO :) > > do you ask say - microsoft - about supporting program that doesn't run under > windows, but runs under - say - MacOS. > > no. > > so stop asking on FreeBSD group about flash support. it's not FreeBSD > developers job. Wojciech - I know you are a very competent and experienced user when it comes to FBSD so do not treat my post as kind of a flame war. Let me say this - if you want to help, please do. There are many times when your replies are helpful (gmirror comes to mind) but more often than not you discourage beginners from getting interested in this project. Please stop doing that. Please. It seems to me that you are forcing your views on everyone by looking at reality from your point of view only. I wouldn't have written this if it was only tiring, but it is also harmful to the communit at large, especially those who are interested in giving FBSD a try. Best regards, -- Zbigniew Szalbot www.fairtrade.net.pl www.slowo.pl ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:48:55 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: >>> thousands of unix software that runs on unices including FreeBSD? >> >> I don't see the difference. If a program runs on FreeBSD it runs on >> FreeBSD, so it _is_ something that FreeBSD users may be interested in >> for their every day work. Does it really matter if the particular piece >> of software also runs on AmigaOS? Not really, IMO :) > > do you ask say - microsoft - about supporting program that doesn't run > under windows, but runs under - say - MacOS. In the hypothetical scenario that I would be a Mac user who is happy with his MacOS application, why would I want to bother with Microsoft at all? In the other hypothetical scenario that I would be a happy Microsoft user who finds something nice about MacOS, would I ask MacOS people if they want to port their program to Windows, or would I ask the rest of my Windows pals if they know of an equivalent program for my OS? > no. You are drawing a hypothetical scenario out of thin air, a fictional answer that *I* would give in that case, and then responding to that answer. It sounds like fun, but it isn't very useful as an argument that proves some unstated point. > so stop asking on FreeBSD group about flash support. it's not FreeBSD > developers job. I'm not asking FreeBSD developers about flash support. One of the reasons is that I _am_ one of the FreeBSD developers, so I (usually) know what works and what doesn't. Another reason is that Flash is not everything. There are literally _thousands_ of programs that one can use on FreeBSD. You seem to be fervently pushing an agenda that FreeBSD should do one thing or that freebsd-questions should do another, but you are missing a very important point: FreeBSD is not something because we "wish" it to be that thing. It is and it becomes what we _make_ it be. So, if you want it to be an OS that ignores anything that has not been specifically `designed for BSD', including the thousands of programs included in the Ports collection, you are free to do so with _your_ installations of FreeBSD. What irks me and really gets me to spend some time answering posts in this thread is that you seem to believe that it is ok to tell everybody else what to do with *their* FreeBSD time or what to support on freebsd-questions by spending _their_ time writing helpful answers to user questions. I'm afraid this isn't going to work very well. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
thousands of unix software that runs on unices including FreeBSD? I don't see the difference. If a program runs on FreeBSD it runs on FreeBSD, so it _is_ something that FreeBSD users may be interested in for their every day work. Does it really matter if the particular piece of software also runs on AmigaOS? Not really, IMO :) do you ask say - microsoft - about supporting program that doesn't run under windows, but runs under - say - MacOS. no. so stop asking on FreeBSD group about flash support. it's not FreeBSD developers job. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 18:24:13 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> Technical note: questions@ may be an appropriate forum for > > general discussion about FreeBSD, or general discussion about > thousands of unix software that runs on unices including FreeBSD? I don't see the difference. If a program runs on FreeBSD it runs on FreeBSD, so it _is_ something that FreeBSD users may be interested in for their every day work. Does it really matter if the particular piece of software also runs on AmigaOS? Not really, IMO :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
FreeBSD topic? WITH BROWSER. ask browser programmers for that. Do you really, honestly expect Mozilla, Galeon, Epiphany and any random i expect to support any unix. and they do. unfortunately they didn't write flash module, so you have to use abobe flash that is available as binary only for lots os OS but NOT FREEBSD. you should ask Adobe for it. that's all. FreeBSD doesn't have to support flash. It doesn't even have to support watching WWW pages because (contrary to - say - windoze) IT IS NOT PART OF OS! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Technical note: questions@ may be an appropriate forum for general discussion about FreeBSD, or general discussion about thousands of unix software that runs on unices including FreeBSD? general discussion; however, as things progress to the technical it becomes more appropriate for either hackers@ or a...@. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 01:03:39 -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: >> after reading all these posts, i've still come up with this answer >> after looking .. "freebsd - the power to serve" > > Might one reasonably surmise that "the power to serve" implies doing a > good job of running server software? Like mail servers, FTP servers, > web servers, file servers, database servers, ssh servers, even - gasp > - X11 servers? I am 'served' quite well by my GUI programs too, if that's part of the question. The word 'service' is not limited by the very narrow meaning of an IP based or other network application :-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 10:38:18 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> Isn't getting Flash working *with* FreeBSD (and browser of choice) a >> FreeBSD topic? > > WITH BROWSER. ask browser programmers for that. Do you really, honestly expect Mozilla, Galeon, Epiphany and any random browser team to support FreeBSD users? I think that's stretching it a bit. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat 13 Dec 2008 at 01:44:03 PST Chad Perrin wrote: I rather suspect that a much stronger, and more common, reason for obstinate refusal to open specs is the short-sightedness and general ignorance of daycoders and pointy-haired bosses -- all of whom think Java is the best programming language around because that's what "most" programmers use and have some vague, unsupported (but stubborn) notion that secrets are good for business. At least it *seems* they all think so. There's no need to impute any insidious or lazy motive to them. If they can sell their product without documenting any API's, they will tend to do so, as a way of cutting costs and thus increasing their profits. As for their "obstinate refusal", I think they often have a reasonable fear that if they do provide documentation, it will create an ongoing demand for support. No matter how much effort you put into documentation, there always seem to be some questions you haven't answered, and people will be pestering you for the answers. More costs! But once you've opened the door by publishing the documentation, it's hard to close it gracefully. So they probably figure it's better to just say no at the outset. (None of this has much of anything to do with FreeBSD, and I apologize for replying to something off-topic. But I felt I had to speak out against an all-too-common prejudice.) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Michel Talon writes: > As you suggest, first, discussions about the direction FreeBSD > should go are eminently FreeBSD related, Technical note: questions@ may be an appropriate forum for general discussion; however, as things progress to the technical it becomes more appropriate for either hackers@ or a...@. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Glyn Millington wrote: > > But, we can _gently_ (it hasn't always been so gentle) teach > > newbies that the list is meant for something higher than just > > repeatedly ragging on why isn't FreeBSD more like MS or RHEL > > or whatever. > > Or even "why isn't FreeBSD more like FreeBSD used to be back in the > day?" As you suggest, first, discussions about the direction FreeBSD should go are eminently FreeBSD related, and second, i think the passeists in the community, broadly speaking the sysadmins, not the programmers, are the worst enemies of FreeBSD progress. A number of obvious errors have crept in the thread, for example that Linux is crap - it has never been as good, and now outperforms FreeBSD in nearly everything - or that Gnome and Kde have nothing to do with FreeBSD, when there are dedicated FreeBSD teams working precisely on that. The idea that an OS has to be a server OS (translate, friendly to sysadmins) rather than a desktop OS leads directly to irrelevance (example Solaris), while the crappiest of the crappiest desktop OS succeeds in getting a foothold in server space, simply because people are used to it, and don't want to complicate their life. In general an OS gets hardware support proportional to the number of its users, so it is criminal to advocate concentrating on a niche use. Specifically for the question of nVidia 64 bits support, the nVidia engineers have clearly stated their intention of developing the driver as soon as appropriate kernel support is present, so as to be able to dothe same thing they are doing under Linux - a very understandable requirement. It happens that, for several years, no one has been able or willing to provide this kernel support. This is harming FreeBSD in an obvious way, but personally i could not care less, i use Intel video card. -- Michel TALON ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Jerry McAllister writes: > But, we can _gently_ (it hasn't always been so gentle) teach > newbies that the list is meant for something higher than just > repeatedly ragging on why isn't FreeBSD more like MS or RHEL > or whatever. Or even "why isn't FreeBSD more like FreeBSD used to be back in the day?" As a newcomer to FreeBSD (who will never be a programmer or serious sysadmin) I'm grateful for the firm but fair approach taken here by most people, for the toleration of my occasional inanities, and for helpful answers. I'm also grateful to Chad for helping me look at again at Compiz-fusion - I prefer fvwm myself, but CF IS gorgeous, no doubt about it, and my eleven year old thinks its cool :-) atb Glyn ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" I think too much of this discussion is OT, maybe it's time to go in freebsd-c...@? indeed. with this and other non-freebsd topics ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
- Original Message - From: "prad" To: Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 9:25 PM Subject: Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:59:46 +0200 "Ivailo Bonev" wrote: What's your problem with Lada?! :-D They make cars (especially Niva) to drive everywhere! well may be they could work on the nvidia drivers. they already have 4 of the 6 letters correct. Just my 2 euro cents... lol ok ok i admit that was a very desperate attempt at a joke. but you must understand that today your 2 euro cents is 3.3 of our canadian cents, so our humor can't go as far. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" I think too much of this discussion is OT, maybe it's time to go in freebsd-c...@? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here. exactly what i wrote. the problem is that people like You (and millions others) are willing to buy product without any documentation. You may find this surprising, but sometimes circumstances lead people to make purchases of "total package" products rather than building something there are products for them. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 09:35:59PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>NVidia MUST INCLUDE full documentation of their hardware. > >>this is normal - hardware manufacturer produces hardware, programmers > >>do make support for it. > >> > >>what is common today isn't normal. > > > >I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here. > > exactly what i wrote. the problem is that people like You (and millions > others) are willing to buy product without any documentation. You may find this surprising, but sometimes circumstances lead people to make purchases of "total package" products rather than building something piecemeal or being able to specify what goes into a purchase at a very fine-grained level. Laptop purchases in particular suffer the problem of tending to be preconfigured package deals -- and sometimes you have to compromise on getting fully documented hardware with open specs in order to meet other requirements that are more critical to your immediate needs. This may especially be a problem for people who need a known-good physical interface to stave off repetitive stress injury (for example). Then again, judging by some of your statements, you probably feel that laptops should never be used with FreeBSD unless they've been repurposed as file servers. > > if you think they do this to hide their hardware secrets you are wrong. > See x86 instruction set - does it reveal how Intel or Amd made their > processor so fast? no! > > They do this to hide their hardware faults that way - that's the true > reason they do this. > > With new hardware produced every year it MUST be buggy and certainly there > are thousands of hardware bugs. > > with "secret" drivers - they can easily hide them. AFAIK at least half of > their driver code are to do workaround of their hardware bugs. I rather suspect that a much stronger, and more common, reason for obstinate refusal to open specs is the short-sightedness and general ignorance of daycoders and pointy-haired bosses -- all of whom think Java is the best programming language around because that's what "most" programmers use and have some vague, unsupported (but stubborn) notion that secrets are good for business. At least it *seems* they all think so. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] A: It reverses the normal flow of conversation. Q: What's wrong with top-posting? pgpDfzZYrLeoO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Isn't getting Flash working *with* FreeBSD (and browser of choice) a FreeBSD topic? WITH BROWSER. ask browser programmers for that. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:46:03PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >I mean seriously, has this helped anything at all? > > no. all i want is to stop all stupid topics about: > > - KDE/Gnome/other crap (or great things for somebody) > > BECAUSE IT'S NOT PART OF FREEBSD. FreeBSD has nothing to this, except > KDE/Gnome/whatever can be run on it Isn't discussion of getting KDE/GNOME/whatever working *with* FreeBSD a FreeBSD topic? > > - support of flash in Opera/Firefox/Whatever > > again BECAUSE WWW BROWSER ARE NOT PART OF FREEBSD. Isn't getting Flash working *with* FreeBSD (and browser of choice) a FreeBSD topic? > > - support of new/hot (literally)/super/extra graphics cards from NVidia. > > BECAUSE Xorg IS NOT PART OF FREEBSD. Isn't getting X.org working *with* FreeBSD (with a particular graphics adapter) a FreeBSD topic? > > While IMHO full graphics support (graphics support, not GUI) should be > part of kernel as driver, it isn't. Isn't that, too, a FreeBSD topic -- whether graphics support should be addressed as part of the FreeBSD base system's scope? > > As NVidia card Xorg module does need some kernel wrapper (no idea why) - > then there is nothing wrong for interested people to write it as ADD > ON/PORT. > > - asking about bloat level, visual apperance comparision etc. between > FreeBSD with KDE and Windoze. > > because KDE ARE NOT PART OF FREEBSD, and FreeBSD on it's own doesn't have > (fortunately) any "desktop environment" so it can't be compared. Isn't "FreeBSD + $foo" a FreeBSD topic? > > if someone like to compare KDE with windoze - OK but NOT THIS GROUP! KDE is not an operating system and -- despite jokes to the contrary -- installing MS Windows on a computer does indeed give one an operating system. It takes something like FreeBSD, in addition to KDE, to have a valid OS+GUI comparison with MS Windows. > > SO - please just stop ALL NTG topics here. this group really lacks > moderator. not someone that will remove posts he considers "lame" but all > that is off topic. > > Off topic=not about FreeBSD OS. I'm amazed that you seem to think that making FreeBSD do what one wants it to do isn't a FreeBSD topic. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Paul Graham: "Real ugliness is not harsh-looking syntax, but having to build programs out of the wrong concepts." pgpd2poBdaNfb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
that's why it would be good to finally introduce moderation on that list - to cut off 95% of traffic that is not about FreeBSD. Moderation, like all bureaucracy and oversight, a chainsaw -- not a scalpel. One should always be wary of its use where even the slightest error might result in significant loss of value. you may be right. moderation (censorship) on country or so level is just bad (TM). but FreeBSD is just a project, and it has owners (developer core team) - so it's different. and what i ask is not to just dump out people asking about "what's program like photoshop for FreeBSD", but creating list group for that (freebsd-softw...@... or freebsd-progr...@...) and redirecting them there! and leave freebsd-questions for QUESTIONS ABOUT FREEBSD ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 01:26:36PM -0800, Brian Whalen wrote: > michael wrote: > >has anyone stopped at all during this discussion and considered what > >you're arguing about? you're all complaining about a SERVER os that > >doesn't have an nvidia driver for its 64bit implementation and Wojciech. > >I mean seriously, has this helped anything at all? is ranting on here > >about those two things going to change 8.0 to be the next best gaming > >console? no. if you want to use freebsd on your desktop with 3D you > >can. just run i386. but this entire thread has gone down hill from the > >OP, and it is nonsense. you get a few more registers with 64bit and > >some more ram, big deal. show me a gaming console that needs more than > >four gigs of ram. its not a priority and it shouldn't be. this is a > >server class operating system that you CAN use on your desk if wanted. > >even linux in all its glory with an nvidia 64bit driver isn't all that > >great at gaming, i'm sorry its just not. its not that great with 3D > >modeling either(in house and proprietary software like maya do not > >count). > > It is a great server OS. Perhaps some would like it to be a better > desktop OS? PC BSD not good enough for some I suppose? You could > always get a Mac and run the NIX underneath it when needed. I like FreeBSD more than PC-BSD as a desktop OS, personally. I don't like the "do it our way" mentality of these "user friendly" desktop oriented OSes. What I want more of is functionality -- not featuritis. So, no . . . PC-BSD isn't "good enough" for my purposes, because it's serving someone else's purposes entirely. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Henry Spencer: "Those who don't understand Unix are doomed to reinvent it, poorly." pgpjUWMicCiuq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:22:15AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >There is _nothing_ that is inherently "server oriented" about the main > >FreeBSD tree, and it hasn't "split" to anything of the sort. > > exactly! FreeBSD is unix oriented! > > everything else depends on what you install. > > that's why it would be good to finally introduce moderation on that list - > to cut off 95% of traffic that is not about FreeBSD. Moderation, like all bureaucracy and oversight, a chainsaw -- not a scalpel. One should always be wary of its use where even the slightest error might result in significant loss of value. Interestingly, my random signature generator seems to have something to say about this topic as well. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Jon Postel, RFC 761: "[B]e conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others." pgpWR0TVKtkqX.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
The spirit of replying to all questions, even if they are similar to ``How do I process images with a Photoshop-like program on FreeBSD?'', or even ``Windows lets me use FOO and do BAR. Is there something like this in FreeBSD?'', seems to be one of the *good* aspects of this list. it is bad aspect, just it got more severe last times. Why should we destroy that good aspect by introducing moderation? i want to destroy bad things and keep discussion on topic. now it's MAYBE 1 post on-topic and 20 off-topic. at least. i don't mean blocking it completely, but on THAT list which is "questions about FreeBSD". Not "questions about millions of programs available for unix". if "questions about various unix programs running under FreeBSD" list will be created, i will be a place for that. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 08:00:45AM +, Glyn Millington wrote: > Jerry McAllister writes: > > > > But, we can _gently_ (it hasn't always been so gentle) teach > > newbies that the list is meant for something higher than just > > repeatedly ragging on why isn't FreeBSD more like MS or RHEL > > or whatever. > > Or even "why isn't FreeBSD more like FreeBSD used to be back in the day?" > > As a newcomer to FreeBSD (who will never be a programmer or serious > sysadmin) I'm grateful for the firm but fair approach taken here by most > people, for the toleration of my occasional inanities, and for helpful > answers. > > I'm also grateful to Chad for helping me look at again at Compiz-fusion - > I prefer fvwm myself, but CF IS gorgeous, no doubt about it, and my > eleven year old thinks its cool :-) Thanks for expressing your appreciation. I don't have any interest in using Compiz Fusion in my day to day life, either, but it sure is an eye opener and fun to look at every once in a while. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth James Madison: "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." pgp8Rsd8YE1Is.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
"freebsd - the power to serve" Might one reasonably surmise that "the power to serve" implies doing a good job of running server software? Like mail servers, FTP servers, web servers, file servers, database servers, ssh servers, even - gasp - X11 servers? so what's wrong. it runs well any program. of course it won't run well bad program - it's natural. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
> after reading all these posts, i've still come up with this > answer after looking .. > "freebsd - the power to serve" Might one reasonably surmise that "the power to serve" implies doing a good job of running server software? Like mail servers, FTP servers, web servers, file servers, database servers, ssh servers, even - gasp - X11 servers? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 02:28:54 +0200 Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > It seems natural > to return the favor now, and reply to *all* questions that I can help > with; even if their relation to FreeBSD is very 'weak'. > i think that is both very generous, appropriate and in keeping with the spirit of freebsd. beastie is after all a daemon would be pleased :) -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On December 12, 2008 07:28:54 pm Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 00:22:15 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> There is _nothing_ that is inherently "server oriented" about the main > >> FreeBSD tree, and it hasn't "split" to anything of the sort. > > > > exactly! FreeBSD is unix oriented! > > > > everything else depends on what you install. > > > > that's why it would be good to finally introduce moderation on that > > list > > That's a logical leap I am not comfortable with. > > Back when I posted my first question here, some time during the summer > of 1999, it seemed very nice that older FreeBSD users replied to my > questions without chastising me for being "off topic". It seems natural > to return the favor now, and reply to *all* questions that I can help > with; even if their relation to FreeBSD is very 'weak'. > > The spirit of replying to all questions, even if they are similar to > ``How do I process images with a Photoshop-like program on FreeBSD?'', > or even ``Windows lets me use FOO and do BAR. Is there something like > this in FreeBSD?'', seems to be one of the *good* aspects of this list. > > Why should we destroy that good aspect by introducing moderation? > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Agreed. The noise level on this list is quite low, and off-topic threads get discouraged after a few iterations. I would NOT be in favour of moderation - I like it the way it is. -- Mike Jeays http://www.jeays.ca ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 02:28:54AM +0200, Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 00:22:15 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar > wrote: > >> There is _nothing_ that is inherently "server oriented" about the main > >> FreeBSD tree, and it hasn't "split" to anything of the sort. > > > > exactly! FreeBSD is unix oriented! > > > > everything else depends on what you install. > > > > that's why it would be good to finally introduce moderation on that > > list > > That's a logical leap I am not comfortable with. > > Back when I posted my first question here, some time during the summer > of 1999, it seemed very nice that older FreeBSD users replied to my > questions without chastising me for being "off topic". It seems natural > to return the favor now, and reply to *all* questions that I can help > with; even if their relation to FreeBSD is very 'weak'. > > The spirit of replying to all questions, even if they are similar to > ``How do I process images with a Photoshop-like program on FreeBSD?'', > or even ``Windows lets me use FOO and do BAR. Is there something like > this in FreeBSD?'', seems to be one of the *good* aspects of this list. > > Why should we destroy that good aspect by introducing moderation? A voice of wisdom! But, we can _gently_ (it hasn't always been so gentle) teach newbies that the list is meant for something higher than just repeatedly ragging on why isn't FreeBSD more like MS or RHEL or whatever. Anyway, those example questions you used above are really FreeBSD questions of a sort, (even if kind of newbie-ish and maybe more rightfully belonging on a newbie list) and don't hurt anyone by showing up on the questions list. jerry > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 00:22:15 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> There is _nothing_ that is inherently "server oriented" about the main >> FreeBSD tree, and it hasn't "split" to anything of the sort. > > exactly! FreeBSD is unix oriented! > > everything else depends on what you install. > > that's why it would be good to finally introduce moderation on that > list That's a logical leap I am not comfortable with. Back when I posted my first question here, some time during the summer of 1999, it seemed very nice that older FreeBSD users replied to my questions without chastising me for being "off topic". It seems natural to return the favor now, and reply to *all* questions that I can help with; even if their relation to FreeBSD is very 'weak'. The spirit of replying to all questions, even if they are similar to ``How do I process images with a Photoshop-like program on FreeBSD?'', or even ``Windows lets me use FOO and do BAR. Is there something like this in FreeBSD?'', seems to be one of the *good* aspects of this list. Why should we destroy that good aspect by introducing moderation? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
There is _nothing_ that is inherently "server oriented" about the main FreeBSD tree, and it hasn't "split" to anything of the sort. exactly! FreeBSD is unix oriented! everything else depends on what you install. that's why it would be good to finally introduce moderation on that list - to cut off 95% of traffic that is not about FreeBSD. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 01:28:26 +0300, Usr Random wrote: > Hi dear sirs! > > Correct please if me wrong, but as i know the source tree of FreeBSD > already split into two parts - Servers-oriented (FreeBSD) and PC-BSD > (Desktop oriented) ? Or team from PC-BSD is not FreeBSD peoples? WBR Not really, no. There is _nothing_ that is inherently "server oriented" about the main FreeBSD tree, and it hasn't "split" to anything of the sort. The PC-BSD team is a separate team that develops PC-BSD. Collaboration between the two teams is, of course, more than welcome and it _does_ happen already. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 22:46:03 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: > if someone like to compare KDE with windoze - OK but NOT THIS GROUP! Hold the topic censorship horses there a bit... The freebsd-questions list is a general discussion forum where FreeBSD users exchange opinions, help, support and news about _anything_ that is even a bit related to FreeBSD. We don't discourage people from talking about KDE at _all_; we just redirect them to freebsd-kde@ where the discussion is more topical :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Hi dear sirs! Correct please if me wrong, but as i know the source tree of FreeBSD already split into two parts - Servers-oriented (FreeBSD) and PC-BSD (Desktop oriented) ? Or team from PC-BSD is not FreeBSD peoples? WBR ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
by a larger group of users. If FBSD wants to remain a 'niche' product with limited support for third party products, then the question of why FBSD is not more popular with hardware vendors has been answered. That's exactly what some people want -- though it's not a universal FreeBSD goal, obviously. there are nothing to stop nvidia to write their kernel module as they like. they may do it good, bad, whatever, just it should be ADD ON. it can't cost very much, while there will be larger market for their product. if they don't like, simply don't buy their hardware and request others to write it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
I mean seriously, has this helped anything at all? no. all i want is to stop all stupid topics about: - KDE/Gnome/other crap (or great things for somebody) BECAUSE IT'S NOT PART OF FREEBSD. FreeBSD has nothing to this, except KDE/Gnome/whatever can be run on it - support of flash in Opera/Firefox/Whatever again BECAUSE WWW BROWSER ARE NOT PART OF FREEBSD. - support of new/hot (literally)/super/extra graphics cards from NVidia. BECAUSE Xorg IS NOT PART OF FREEBSD. While IMHO full graphics support (graphics support, not GUI) should be part of kernel as driver, it isn't. As NVidia card Xorg module does need some kernel wrapper (no idea why) - then there is nothing wrong for interested people to write it as ADD ON/PORT. - asking about bloat level, visual apperance comparision etc. between FreeBSD with KDE and Windoze. because KDE ARE NOT PART OF FREEBSD, and FreeBSD on it's own doesn't have (fortunately) any "desktop environment" so it can't be compared. if someone like to compare KDE with windoze - OK but NOT THIS GROUP! SO - please just stop ALL NTG topics here. this group really lacks moderator. not someone that will remove posts he considers "lame" but all that is off topic. Off topic=not about FreeBSD OS. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Brian Whalen wrote: michael wrote: Brian Whalen wrote: michael wrote: has anyone stopped at all during this discussion and considered what you're arguing about? you're all complaining about a SERVER os that doesn't have an nvidia driver for its 64bit implementation and Wojciech. I mean seriously, has this helped anything at all? is ranting on here about those two things going to change 8.0 to be the next best gaming console? no. if you want to use freebsd on your desktop with 3D you can. just run i386. but this entire thread has gone down hill from the OP, and it is nonsense. you get a few more registers with 64bit and some more ram, big deal. show me a gaming console that needs more than four gigs of ram. its not a priority and it shouldn't be. this is a server class operating system that you CAN use on your desk if wanted. even linux in all its glory with an nvidia 64bit driver isn't all that great at gaming, i'm sorry its just not. its not that great with 3D modeling either(in house and proprietary software like maya do not count). It is a great server OS. Perhaps some would like it to be a better desktop OS? PC BSD not good enough for some I suppose? You could always get a Mac and run the NIX underneath it when needed. apparently that isn't an option. i see this all the time in the free os market. i want, i want, i want, i want. hello, there are limited developers and they actually have lives outside of freebsd. Brian Decide what problem you want to solve, and then get the best tool for that problem ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" no doubt, unless we get the multimillion dollar donation like ibm did for linux, it is what it is. I like it, it works for me, but I really can't do more than ask for things since I don't write code. I do QA work, that is about as close as I get. Brian that would be possible if freebsd ran a bit better on power or powerpc based machines. would also help if it had 15 trillion monkey developers like linux. i can't even get freebsd running on a ppc card in a power server. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
michael wrote: has anyone stopped at all during this discussion and considered what you're arguing about? you're all complaining about a SERVER os that doesn't have an nvidia driver for its 64bit implementation and Wojciech. I mean seriously, has this helped anything at all? is ranting on here about those two things going to change 8.0 to be the next best gaming console? no. if you want to use freebsd on your desktop with 3D you can. just run i386. but this entire thread has gone down hill from the OP, and it is nonsense. you get a few more registers with 64bit and some more ram, big deal. show me a gaming console that needs more than four gigs of ram. its not a priority and it shouldn't be. this is a server class operating system that you CAN use on your desk if wanted. even linux in all its glory with an nvidia 64bit driver isn't all that great at gaming, i'm sorry its just not. its not that great with 3D modeling either(in house and proprietary software like maya do not count). It is a great server OS. Perhaps some would like it to be a better desktop OS? PC BSD not good enough for some I suppose? You could always get a Mac and run the NIX underneath it when needed. Brian Decide what problem you want to solve, and then get the best tool for that problem ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 03:02:28PM -0500, Jerry wrote: > On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:32:59 +0100 (CET) > Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > >NVidia MUST INCLUDE full documentation of their hardware. > >this is normal - hardware manufacturer produces hardware, programmers > >do make support for it. > > > >what is common today isn't normal. > > I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here. I think he's trying to say that open source drivers would be preferable, and to develop them we'd need the hardware specs so we'd have a target toward which to develop drivers. Of course, "preferable" is my choice of term -- he seems to be more of the opinion that anything that isn't strictly open source should just be shunned, out of hand. While it would be nice if that was a practical option, it isn't really, at this point. > > NVidia produces both the hardware and drivers for same. It requested > additions/changes to the basic FBSD system to enable their product to be > fully functional. Changes that it seems other manufacturers would also > need. At least four things need to be clarified: 1. Would the requested changes have a negative effect on system design in some way? 2. Would working on making those changes divert important resources from other, perhaps more important, projects? 3. Are the changes the same as what other hardware vendors would need before they could fully support FreeBSD, or are they different -- possibly even contradictory? If the latter, we need to consider whether such contradictions can be worked around without degrading the stability and performance characteristics of the system, and see what impact such work-arounds would have on the answer to question 2. 4. Is there any way we can talk them into helping us work on fully functional open source drivers, as AMD (which bought ATI) has promised to do for the Linux community? I don't know the answers to any of those four questions -- in part because discussion never gets past the "No! You'll destroy FreeBSD if you try to support that hardware!" stage of discussion. > > Now, if FBSD has no intention of working with other hardware and/or > software manufacturers/authors, maybe it should just post a big "KEEP > OUT" sign on its web page. > > I seriously doubt that NVidia, or any other manufacturer is about to > divulge trade secrets or patented information. What point would there > be in that anyway? It is certainly not necessary. What developer in > his/her right mind would be interested in making their product usable > on a FBSD system if they knew that they would have to divulge all of > their trade secrets, etc. Actually, patents are publicly documented by definition -- we're just not *allowed* to use it, once it has been patented, without permission. The sort of thing they don't want to divulge is trade secrets, which you meantioned -- not patents, which you also mentioned. For some reason, though, some hardware vendors seem inclined to use patents as an excuse for keeping secrets, which never made much sense to me. IANAL, though I read about the law from time to time. > > Market share increases by making your product more accessible and usable > by a larger group of users. If FBSD wants to remain a 'niche' product > with limited support for third party products, then the question of why > FBSD is not more popular with hardware vendors has been answered. That's exactly what some people want -- though it's not a universal FreeBSD goal, obviously. -- Quoth Reginald Braithwaite: "Nor is it as easy as piling more features on regardless of how well they fit or whether people will actually use them. Otherwise Windows would have 97% of the market and OS X 3%. (Oh wait.)" pgpoPJt7c9GiO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
has anyone stopped at all during this discussion and considered what you're arguing about? you're all complaining about a SERVER os that doesn't have an nvidia driver for its 64bit implementation and Wojciech. I mean seriously, has this helped anything at all? is ranting on here about those two things going to change 8.0 to be the next best gaming console? no. if you want to use freebsd on your desktop with 3D you can. just run i386. but this entire thread has gone down hill from the OP, and it is nonsense. you get a few more registers with 64bit and some more ram, big deal. show me a gaming console that needs more than four gigs of ram. its not a priority and it shouldn't be. this is a server class operating system that you CAN use on your desk if wanted. even linux in all its glory with an nvidia 64bit driver isn't all that great at gaming, i'm sorry its just not. its not that great with 3D modeling either(in house and proprietary software like maya do not count). ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 01:35:46PM -0500, Michael Powell wrote: > Chad Perrin wrote: > > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 12:05:20PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> > > >> >So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated > >> >graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be considered > >> >a worthy goal? > >> > >> full support of open hardware standards is an requirement. > >> > >> support for closed hardware standards isn't important. > > > > I disagree. I believe, rather, that support for closed hardware specs > > isn't *as* important -- but is still at least somewhat important. > > > > My reservation to the 3D driver thing is it is setting a very dangerous > precedent if the solution involves allowing a third party commercial > enterprise to dictate features FreeBSD "must include" before they will > support it. I agree with you on that matter. Third parties like commercial hardware vendors should not be *dictating* FreeBSD design. I understand wanting to take a careful approach to working with hardware vendors, particularly when they make such demands. I just don't think that one hardware vendor saying something like that is a good reason to abandon all hope of 3D accelerated graphics support beyond what's already there. > > In this case with NVidia and the amd64 3D driver let's say for sake of > argument the developers decide "we want the amd64 3D driver so let's > go ahead and add in abc_function() and xyz_function(). Later the situation > is repeated with ATI mandating that abc_function() or xyz_function() must > be altered to ATI's specs to get ATI 3D acceleration. Now you have two > commercial companies using FreeBSD as the mud puddle in a tug of > war game. > > Do we really want third parties to have the ability to dictate to the devs > what code goes into FreeBSD? I have doubts that this is a good path. No, we don't. When did anyone say otherwise? -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth McCloctnick the Lucid: "The first rule of magic is simple. Don't waste your time waving your hands and hopping when a rock or a club will do." pgpOQgbBYsaLg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Chad Perrin wrote: On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 07:15:35PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: cropping up and saying the equivalent of "If we work on that stuff, FreeBSD will just become MS Windows, and it'll suck." I disagree with because linux got exactly that way and it sucks now. Are you reading this, prad? i've forgotten what the original topic of this post is... on a side note, aix ftw. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 11:07:45AM -0800, prad wrote: > On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:11:48 -0700 > Chad Perrin wrote: > > > I don't recall anyone saying "I'm with such-and-such a FreeBSD > > development team, and these are the reasons we aren't going to do > > anything about that at this time:". > > > i don't either, but these development teams do exist: > http://www.freebsd.org/projects/index.html > and so does a mechanism for initiating projects: > "If you feel that a project is missing, please send the URL and a short > description (3-10 lines) to w...@freebsd.org." That is a much, much better response to questions about improving desktop-oriented functionality than the sort of thing I've been seeing lately from certain anti-lots-of-stuff people on this list: because linux got exactly that way and it sucks now. That's not what I'd call a productive response, nor is it well supported. It doesn't serve as a viable argument -- it's just obstinate refusal to entertain the idea that functionality isn't bad just because its most obvious use is desktop-oriented. > > and i guess as tyson explained there needs to be a balancing of limited > resources. There must always be such a balance -- but I don't see how that in any way prevents us from discussing whether the resources exist. > > > On the other hand, their statements *do* imply that *my* position is > > illegitimate in some way > > > i don't think so. it's more along the lines of "we don't need this in > light of the priorities". Actually, it's more like this: because linux got exactly that way and it sucks now. > > however, i do think michael powell makes a > very good point about "setting a very dangerous precedent" by ending up > allowing "third parties to have the ability to dictate to the devs > what code goes into FreeBSD?" I don't think anything I said suggests we let third parties dictate anything. Please point out where I suggested such a thing. We just need to make sure that we don't confuse "listening to suggestions and discussing their viability, and their technical pros and cons," with "taking orders from MS Windows users." > > > Some people don't know that, and are basically told to go > > away by some people when they bring it up. Still other people > > suggest alternate approaches to fixing the problem, and are also > > basically told to go away, when a more appropriate response would be > > to say "I think you should talk to the people at the swfdec and gnash > > projects about that," in most cases. > > > ok so here's a solution. whenever someone tells people to go away (i > don't think it has been done quite that way, but i see little point in > going into that here), surely others can point to those who are in the > appropriate projects. that way you have the choice of pursuing the > matter or seeking an alternative os. Maybe not "quite that way", but the implication has, at times, been unmistakable. Of course, if someone points people at the appropriate venue for discussing something *after* someone else has said "FOAD", it may already be too late. My preference would be for people who don't have something productive to say, who only want to scare people away, to keep it to themselves. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth H. L. Mencken: "In this world of sin and sorrow, there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." pgpeuPKS3TUsH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 07:15:35PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >cropping up and saying the equivalent of "If we work on that stuff, > >FreeBSD will just become MS Windows, and it'll suck." I disagree with > because linux got exactly that way and it sucks now. Are you reading this, prad? -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Henry Spencer: "Those who don't understand Unix are doomed to reinvent it, poorly." pgpF2wqkD7i31.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 02:44:27PM -0500, Robert Huff wrote: > michael writes: > > > why don't we all just say it. freebsd sucks because it isn't cp/m. > > CP/? Poser. I want my TWENEX back. > :-) What do you have against ITS? -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Paul Graham: "Real ugliness is not harsh-looking syntax, but having to build programs out of the wrong concepts." pgpG5Kt3VIZ0N.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:35:59 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: > They do this to hide their hardware faults that way - that's the true > reason they do this. > this is really interesting. so the 'trade secrets' is largely a smoke-screen. i imagine this would also apply to propriety software as well? this is an interesting article which supports this as well as some other matters: The open and closed case http://www.spider.tm/sep2006/cstory2.html "There are even reports of propriety software introducing new bugs or failing to resolve an existing one. Plus, in case of OSS there are no marketing tactics to be followed unlike closed source companies who may not reveal (or may not even know) the exact number of security flaws in their products." -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:35:59 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: > They do this to hide their hardware faults that way - that's the true > reason they do this. > > With new hardware produced every year it MUST be buggy and certainly > there are thousands of hardware bugs. > > with "secret" drivers - they can easily hide them. AFAIK at least > half of their driver code are to do workaround of their hardware bugs. Your talking about things without providing any evidence as usual. It's just bollocks. NVidia has fabulous 3dgraphics cards and their drivers work very very well. At least they do on solaris (32/64bit). -- Dick Hoogendijk -- PGP/GnuPG key: 01D2433D + http://nagual.nl/ | SunOS sxce snv103 ++ + All that's really worth doing is what we do for others (Lewis Carrol) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
NVidia MUST INCLUDE full documentation of their hardware. this is normal - hardware manufacturer produces hardware, programmers do make support for it. what is common today isn't normal. I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here. exactly what i wrote. the problem is that people like You (and millions others) are willing to buy product without any documentation. if you think they do this to hide their hardware secrets you are wrong. See x86 instruction set - does it reveal how Intel or Amd made their processor so fast? no! They do this to hide their hardware faults that way - that's the true reason they do this. With new hardware produced every year it MUST be buggy and certainly there are thousands of hardware bugs. with "secret" drivers - they can easily hide them. AFAIK at least half of their driver code are to do workaround of their hardware bugs. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 15:02:28 -0500 Jerry wrote: > Market share increases by making your product more accessible and > usable by a larger group of users. > you make a good point here, jerry. what i'm wondering about though is if the 'normal' business model should be applied to fbsd or any opensource stuff in the first place. for instance, opensource 'employees' are volunteers whereas the other guys are salaried or on contract. they advertize, while we advocate. and of course they harbor trade secrets, while opensource is open (especially the bsd license). so perhaps the objective of being 'more accessible and usable' really means something a bit different here. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:32:59 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: >NVidia MUST INCLUDE full documentation of their hardware. >this is normal - hardware manufacturer produces hardware, programmers >do make support for it. > >what is common today isn't normal. I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here. NVidia produces both the hardware and drivers for same. It requested additions/changes to the basic FBSD system to enable their product to be fully functional. Changes that it seems other manufacturers would also need. Now, if FBSD has no intention of working with other hardware and/or software manufacturers/authors, maybe it should just post a big "KEEP OUT" sign on its web page. I seriously doubt that NVidia, or any other manufacturer is about to divulge trade secrets or patented information. What point would there be in that anyway? It is certainly not necessary. What developer in his/her right mind would be interested in making their product usable on a FBSD system if they knew that they would have to divulge all of their trade secrets, etc. Market share increases by making your product more accessible and usable by a larger group of users. If FBSD wants to remain a 'niche' product with limited support for third party products, then the question of why FBSD is not more popular with hardware vendors has been answered. -- Jerry ges...@yahoo.com meeting, n: An assembly of people coming together to decide what person or department not represented in the room must solve a problem. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Robert Huff wrote: michael writes: why don't we all just say it. freebsd sucks because it isn't cp/m. CP/? Poser. I want my TWENEX back. :-) Robert Huff haha, old man. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
michael writes: > why don't we all just say it. freebsd sucks because it isn't cp/m. CP/? Poser. I want my TWENEX back. :-) Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
I disagree. I believe, rather, that support for closed hardware specs isn't *as* important -- but is still at least somewhat important. My reservation to the 3D driver thing is it is setting a very dangerous precedent if the solution involves allowing a third party commercial enterprise to dictate features FreeBSD "must include" before they will support it. NVidia MUST INCLUDE full documentation of their hardware. this is normal - hardware manufacturer produces hardware, programmers do make support for it. what is common today isn't normal. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:59:46 +0200 "Ivailo Bonev" wrote: > What's your problem with Lada?! :-D > They make cars (especially Niva) to drive everywhere! > well may be they could work on the nvidia drivers. they already have 4 of the 6 letters correct. > Just my 2 euro cents... lol > ok ok i admit that was a very desperate attempt at a joke. but you must understand that today your 2 euro cents is 3.3 of our canadian cents, so our humor can't go as far. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 13:35:46 -0500 Michael Powell wrote: >My reservation to the 3D driver thing is it is setting a very dangerous >precedent if the solution involves allowing a third party commercial >enterprise to dictate features FreeBSD "must include" before they will >support it. > >In this case with NVidia and the amd64 3D driver let's say for sake of >argument the developers decide "we want the amd64 3D driver so let's >go ahead and add in abc_function() and xyz_function(). Later the >situation is repeated with ATI mandating that abc_function() or >xyz_function() must be altered to ATI's specs to get ATI 3D >acceleration. Now you have two commercial companies using FreeBSD as >the mud puddle in a tug of war game. > >Do we really want third parties to have the ability to dictate to the >devs what code goes into FreeBSD? I have doubts that this is a good >path. From my understanding of the requests by NVidia; the changes they asked for were required to make a fully functional driver. They also stated that other manufacturers would need/require such code changes also. In any case, I fail to see what the problem is. Microsoft has make numerous modifications to its code to enable third party products to work correctly. With the advent of 'touch screens' now becoming a reality, along with voice recognition, etc., it seems that FreeBSD would want to stay ahead of the curve rather than playing catchup. Heck, unless I am mistaken, the ability to 'hot plug' a USB device does not even exist in FBSD, although I have heard that work is being done on it. Unfortunately, the technology has existed for over ten years. Trying to get hardware vendors interested in your product while simultaneously telling them to go screw themselves because you have no intention of working with them does not seem like a workable business model to me. -- Jerry ges...@yahoo.com Therefore it is necessary to learn how not to be good, and to use this knowledge and not use it, according to the necessity of the cause. Machiavelli signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Chad Perrin wrote: On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 11:45:20PM -0600, Tyson Boellstorff wrote: On Thursday 11 December 2008 19:58:14 Chad Perrin wrote: On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 05:00:11PM -0800, prad wrote: On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:28:13 -0700 i don't think that's really what is happening, chad. i think there is just some disagreement as to what is considered an improvement. So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be considered a worthy goal? Not so much considered 'unworthy' as it is a balancing of limited resources. If I was a hardware programmer, had unlimited time, beer, and cheese dip, I'd add everything just because I could. I don't think anyone said anything about taking development effort away from, for instance, the network virtualization project to put into achieving better 3D accelerated graphics -- just that it would be nice if we had better support for 3D accelerated graphics. One need not entirely write off the notion of putting more effort into one thing to assure that we don't cease putting effort into another. One of the great things about open source development is that, often, more development talent can be found for new projects from people just idling around the periphery. It would be cool if there was a way to ensure that all items would be supported. However, even then, high performance video would lag. It is often proprietary, and many vendors simply won't publish their specs and need a reverse engineer to get any support at all. You can't force them to do it, and in the case of an open source OS, they may not want the world+dog to see their code for any number of reasons. nVidia is a rare exception, and even they are not going to put FreeBSD support at the top of their list. What does that have to do with whether or not it's a good idea to solicit graphics and driver developers who aren't already doing something to work on it, if they're so inclined? Long story short, there's room for all types. Enjoy the diversity. Fix what you can. Avoid the problems you can. Use the appropriate tools for their best purposes. Judging by the responses of some people on this list, there *isn't* room for all types. That's my problem with this whole mess. why don't we all just say it. freebsd sucks because it isn't cp/m. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:11:48 -0700 Chad Perrin wrote: > I don't recall anyone saying "I'm with such-and-such a FreeBSD > development team, and these are the reasons we aren't going to do > anything about that at this time:". > i don't either, but these development teams do exist: http://www.freebsd.org/projects/index.html and so does a mechanism for initiating projects: "If you feel that a project is missing, please send the URL and a short description (3-10 lines) to w...@freebsd.org." and i guess as tyson explained there needs to be a balancing of limited resources. > On the other hand, their statements *do* imply that *my* position is > illegitimate in some way > i don't think so. it's more along the lines of "we don't need this in light of the priorities". however, i do think michael powell makes a very good point about "setting a very dangerous precedent" by ending up allowing "third parties to have the ability to dictate to the devs what code goes into FreeBSD?" this is quite possibly a legitimate concern. > Some people don't know that, and are basically told to go > away by some people when they bring it up. Still other people > suggest alternate approaches to fixing the problem, and are also > basically told to go away, when a more appropriate response would be > to say "I think you should talk to the people at the swfdec and gnash > projects about that," in most cases. > ok so here's a solution. whenever someone tells people to go away (i don't think it has been done quite that way, but i see little point in going into that here), surely others can point to those who are in the appropriate projects. that way you have the choice of pursuing the matter or seeking an alternative os. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Chad Perrin wrote: > On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 12:05:20PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> > >> >So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated >> >graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be considered >> >a worthy goal? >> >> full support of open hardware standards is an requirement. >> >> support for closed hardware standards isn't important. > > I disagree. I believe, rather, that support for closed hardware specs > isn't *as* important -- but is still at least somewhat important. > My reservation to the 3D driver thing is it is setting a very dangerous precedent if the solution involves allowing a third party commercial enterprise to dictate features FreeBSD "must include" before they will support it. In this case with NVidia and the amd64 3D driver let's say for sake of argument the developers decide "we want the amd64 3D driver so let's go ahead and add in abc_function() and xyz_function(). Later the situation is repeated with ATI mandating that abc_function() or xyz_function() must be altered to ATI's specs to get ATI 3D acceleration. Now you have two commercial companies using FreeBSD as the mud puddle in a tug of war game. Do we really want third parties to have the ability to dictate to the devs what code goes into FreeBSD? I have doubts that this is a good path. -Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:04:21 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: > there are excellent opensource software and there are crappy > opensource bloatware. > > just being opensource doesn't mean anything > agreed, but we prefer to support opensource from a philosophical perspective even when the quality isn't quite up to scratch. for instance, we use shane hudson's scid which has become chessdb instead of the really excellent chessbase because we preferred to support shane while he was doing scid many years ago. with reference to the desktops, i really don't think the xp offering really compares to either kde or gnome - you can't even get multiple desktops there without third party stuff from what i recall. still some things are available on xp which aren't elsewhere (for various reasons), but i'd rather work around these. actually, i work around kde and gnome too (even though i think they're pretty decent), and use dwm. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
- Original Message - From: "Tyson Boellstorff" To: Sent: Friday, December 12, 2008 7:45 AM Subject: Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors On Thursday 11 December 2008 19:58:14 Chad Perrin wrote: On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 05:00:11PM -0800, prad wrote: > On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:28:13 -0700 > > i don't think that's really what is happening, chad. > i think there is just some disagreement as to what is considered an > improvement. So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be considered a worthy goal? Not so much considered 'unworthy' as it is a balancing of limited resources. If I was a hardware programmer, had unlimited time, beer, and cheese dip, I'd add everything just because I could. It would be cool if there was a way to ensure that all items would be supported. However, even then, high performance video would lag. It is often proprietary, and many vendors simply won't publish their specs and need a reverse engineer to get any support at all. You can't force them to do it, and in the case of an open source OS, they may not want the world+dog to see their code for any number of reasons. nVidia is a rare exception, and even they are not going to put FreeBSD support at the top of their list. Unless you have a job at some video chipset maker, and are of a truly generous spirit, willing to risk your job in order to publish drivers, it really doesn't matter what priority the powers that be give to video acceleration -- we can't ask anyone to risk their job just so works. If the graphics devices themselves are sub-optimal, getting related systems up to a razor-sharp performance level is like putting nitro and a supercharger in your Lada. You'd have to put it in the back seat, because there's no room in the engine compartment for it. What's your problem with Lada?! :-D They make cars (especially Niva) to drive everywhere! Just my 2 euro cents... lol ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
cropping up and saying the equivalent of "If we work on that stuff, FreeBSD will just become MS Windows, and it'll suck." I disagree with because linux got exactly that way and it sucks now. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 12:05:20PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > >So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated > >graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be considered > >a worthy goal? > > full support of open hardware standards is an requirement. > > support for closed hardware standards isn't important. I disagree. I believe, rather, that support for closed hardware specs isn't *as* important -- but is still at least somewhat important. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] My first programming koan: If a lambda has the ability to access its context, but there isn't any context to access -- is it still a closure? pgpWMVBkqGCY2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 09:50:36PM -0800, prad wrote: > On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:58:14 -0700 > Chad Perrin wrote: > > > So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated > > graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be > > considered a worthy goal? > > > no. access to hardware probably is a worthy goal, however, you need > people to write the software and it's up to the freebsd team(s) to > determine if 3d graphics is or is not worthy, isn't it? I don't recall anyone saying "I'm with such-and-such a FreeBSD development team, and these are the reasons we aren't going to do anything about that at this time:". All I recall is several people cropping up and saying the equivalent of "If we work on that stuff, FreeBSD will just become MS Windows, and it'll suck." I disagree with that estimation -- but if someone wants to offer an actually reasonable argument, I'm all ears (or eyes, since this is a textual discussion). > > > This is completely orthogonal to the question of whether people who > > express a desire for better support for desktop functionality should > > be excoriated publicly on this mailing list, and spanked for having > > the audacity to want to migrate from MS Windows to FreeBSD for use as > > a desktop OS. > > > this is a pretty nice list and i haven't found much spanking going on > here. The "spanking" I have seen largely seems to focus on this particular area, and is mostly championed by one person, though. I guess I find it even more offensive because it's an exception rather than the rule here, and I rather like the otherwise helpful spirit of this community. > > > I agree that desktop usage should not take priority over more > > fundamental quality concerns in FreeBSD development. Telling people > > to stick it in their ear when they say it would be nice to have Flash > > support is not related to the ability to prioritize development > > goals, though. > > > i agree that telling people to "stick it in their ear" is not nice, but > i don't recall anyone doing so. unfortunately, if i ask for evidence > regarding this, you'll probably just tell me to RTFML as you did in > your other reply. It was a summary and paraphrase -- I don't recall anyone literally using the phrase "stick it in your ear". Please try to follow the discussion, rather than being diverted by paraphrases, since I don't have the whole mailing list archive memorized. > > > Desire for better desktop functionality doesn't have to equate to > > wanting desktop-oriented development to "control the reins of > > development" for the whole system. Why the hell do you seem to think > > it does? > > > i don't know why you think that's what i think. what i said was that > was a concern. i certainly do know that in other areas > (computer education for instance), user convenience has destroyed > technical know-how (specifically, at some schools when the graphic > interface emerged in the 80s, word-processing dominated programming and > the some schools lost their thinkers). microsoft's catering to user > desires has produced some rather inferior software too. I think that's what you think because "control the reins of development" was a verbatim quote of what *you* said. I don't see greater core functionality and better driver support is just superficial "user convenience". It's not like I'm suggesting FreeBSD should violate privilege separation so people don't have to worry about the difference between user accounts and administrative accounts, or that it should make booting into KDE without a password the default behavior on boot so people don't have to worry about that icky CLI and memorize passwords. I'm not even suggesting that FreeBSD should adopt the MS Windows default, automatic wireless network roaming behavior. I'm just trying to suggest that opposition to discussing whether the resources exist to address some driver issues is kind of silly (for instance). > > may be it doesn't have to be that way, but often there is a price to be > paid for 'convenience'. There is, indeed, a price to be paid for (poorly planned) attempts to improve convenience. Luckily, that's not what I'm suggesting -- nor is it what everybody else who would like an improved GUI environment is suggesting. > > > Hell, I think the more server-oriented development > > philosophy of FreeBSD is actually a big part of the reason it works > > so well as a desktop OS! Maintaining a more server-oriented > > development philosophy in *no w
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 11:45:20PM -0600, Tyson Boellstorff wrote: > On Thursday 11 December 2008 19:58:14 Chad Perrin wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 05:00:11PM -0800, prad wrote: > > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:28:13 -0700 > > > > > > i don't think that's really what is happening, chad. > > > i think there is just some disagreement as to what is considered an > > > improvement. > > > > So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated > > graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be considered > > a worthy goal? > > > > Not so much considered 'unworthy' as it is a balancing of limited resources. > If I was a hardware programmer, had unlimited time, beer, and cheese dip, I'd > add everything just because I could. I don't think anyone said anything about taking development effort away from, for instance, the network virtualization project to put into achieving better 3D accelerated graphics -- just that it would be nice if we had better support for 3D accelerated graphics. One need not entirely write off the notion of putting more effort into one thing to assure that we don't cease putting effort into another. One of the great things about open source development is that, often, more development talent can be found for new projects from people just idling around the periphery. > > It would be cool if there was a way to ensure that all items would be > supported. However, even then, high performance video would lag. It is often > proprietary, and many vendors simply won't publish their specs and need a > reverse engineer to get any support at all. You can't force them to do it, > and in the case of an open source OS, they may not want the world+dog to see > their code for any number of reasons. nVidia is a rare exception, and even > they are not going to put FreeBSD support at the top of their list. What does that have to do with whether or not it's a good idea to solicit graphics and driver developers who aren't already doing something to work on it, if they're so inclined? > > Long story short, there's room for all types. Enjoy the diversity. Fix what > you can. Avoid the problems you can. Use the appropriate tools for their best > purposes. Judging by the responses of some people on this list, there *isn't* room for all types. That's my problem with this whole mess. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Georg Hackl: "American beer is the first successful attempt at diluting water." pgpZdnKLZb4aN.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 07:04:18PM -0800, prad wrote: > > > Each time, I have very > > clearly stated my disagreement with his estimation of FreeBSD as > > being thoroughly beaten by MS Windows in that area, with that URL > > provided as evidence to back my claim. > > > the problem is that is your own posting > (http://sob.apotheon.org/?p=335), not that it should automatically be > disqualified for that reason. also, the focus seems to specifically on > eye-candy: > "open source systems are currently better at glitz and glamour than > Microsoft and Apple systems". It's a problem that I built an argument rather than appealing to authority . . . ? How is that a problem? Eye candy was the point he kept arguing. That's the point that addressed. Where's the problem here? > > i don't disagree with you that opensource stuff is much better even if > they don't have certain things. however, is this really a freebsd issue > or a particular version of a desktop that is offered by a unix system. > freebsd doesn't offer the most recent versions (and that's not > necessarily a bad thing). FreeBSD offers newer versions of a lot of stuff in its stable products than many comparable Linux distribution releases. Furthermore, since I was comparing FreeBSD with MS Windows (in response to claims that it simply can't measure up to MS Windows), I don't think your weak protest that FreeBSD is somehow "behind" something like, say, Arch Linux, is very applicable. > > > Each time, he has completely ignored what I said and the URL I > > provided. He keeps coming back to make exactly the same sort of > > claims he has before, utterly failing to addresses arguments against > > his hand-waving statements without any logical or evidenciary > > support. Nobody else has bothered to dispute what I've said, either. > > > while i would not use xp, somethings do work with less effort there > than say ubuntu. there are certain programs like voice recognition that > there isn't an equivalent for with opensource, yet. Great. Let's work on getting voice recognition software working better with open source software so people with disabilities will not be prevented from using open source OSes as effectively as they'd like. That doesn't mean we need to abandon everything FreeBSD stands for, and doesn't even necessarily have to mean we're making the OS more desktop centric -- and doesn't really have anything to do with the points I was making, so I'm not sure why you brought that up, unless you're trying to say that since it's easier to get voice recognition software working on MS Windows we just shouldn't try for fear of becoming "infected" with MS Windows design philosophy somehow. > > despite this, i certainly try to demonstrate to people why they should > use opensource rather than windoze. Good for you. This wasn't about you, though. > > > In absence of, at *minimum*, some half-assed attempt to make a case > > against what I've provided, I will continue to regard his repetition > > of disputed, unsupported statements to be dishonest or at least wildly > > inaccurate. > > > i think his arguments go beyond the eye candy realm. he is not alone, > you know. i recall reading a few years ago, the creator of the > enlightenment wm saying that the desktop war was long lost to windoze. > i don't know if that is correct these days, but it certainly seemed so > then. I was referring to a specific example. Please either address the example under discussion or concede the point about that example and explain that you'd like to discuss other matters. If I recall correctly, the E creator was talking about *market share*, which is not the same thing as functionality by any stretch of the imagination. > > > Would you prefer I just accept his statements, which fly in the face > > of my own experience, even after he fails to answer supported > > disputations of their content, just because it's him and you say he > > has to be right about everything? > > > chad, you are fantasizing now. i never said he has to be right about > everything. in fact, i know for certain that he is wrong whenever he > disagrees with me. :D That's called "hyperbole": http://www.bartleby.com/61/63/H0356300.html > > i don't think you need to accept his statements. i do think it would be > better if we could drop the name calling and the anger, displayed in > the earlier posts. if he fails "to answer supported disputations of > their content", you can certainly ask him to deal with the matter at > hand. How should I do so, exactly? I presented the same exact argument to him three or four times, and he ignored it every time. After three strikes, you're out, as far as I'm concerned. At that point, just repeating the same FUD is trolling -- so I asked him to stop trolling. Now, this lengthy debate with you, because you don't think he's done anything wrong, and I'm a bad person somehow for asking him to stop spreading that FUD. > > > Even if his sta
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:58:02 +0100 Bernt Hansson wrote: > > >Julien Cigar skrev: >> On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 00:23 +0100, Bernt Hansson wrote: >>> Julien Cigar said the following on 2008-12-11 14:40: - Altough ports are fantastic, building things like OpenOffice or ... is just inhuman, especially when you cannot use -j for building ports (but it's being resolved I think). >>> Of course you can use -j to build ports. >>> >>> Just cd to/your/port make -j8 install (clean) >>> With portupgrade you use -m -j8 >>> >> >> I'm not sure about this, as there is just a project in titled >> "Allowing for parallel builds in the FreeBSD Ports" on >> http://www.freebsd.org/projects/summerofcode-2008.html ... ? >> >> Every time I tried to build a port with -j it failed .. >> >>From todays portupgrade -aiR -m -j8 > >Building '/usr/ports/textproc/asciidoc' with make flags: -j8 This entire thread has really gotten OT. Maybe it is time to close it. -- Jerry ges...@yahoo.com Remember, drive defensively! And of course, the best defense is a good offense! signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be considered a worthy goal? full support of open hardware standards is an requirement. support for closed hardware standards isn't important. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
i don't disagree with you that opensource stuff is much better even if they don't have certain things. however, is this really a freebsd issue there are excellent opensource software and there are crappy opensource bloatware. just being opensource doesn't mean anything ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 00:23 +0100, Bernt Hansson wrote: > Julien Cigar said the following on 2008-12-11 14:40: > > - Altough ports are fantastic, building things like OpenOffice or ... is > > just inhuman, especially when you cannot use -j for building ports (but > > it's being resolved I think). > > Of course you can use -j to build ports. > > Just cd to/your/port make -j8 install (clean) > With portupgrade you use -m -j8 > I'm not sure about this, as there is just a project in titled "Allowing for parallel builds in the FreeBSD Ports" on http://www.freebsd.org/projects/summerofcode-2008.html ... ? Every time I tried to build a port with -j it failed .. -- Julien Cigar Belgian Biodiversity Platform http://www.biodiversity.be Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB) Campus de la Plaine CP 257 Bâtiment NO, Bureau 4 N4 115C (Niveau 4) Boulevard du Triomphe, entrée ULB 2 B-1050 Bruxelles Mail: jci...@ulb.ac.be @biobel: http://biobel.biodiversity.be/person/show/471 Tel : 02 650 57 52 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:58:14 -0700 Chad Perrin wrote: > So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated > graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be > considered a worthy goal? > no. access to hardware probably is a worthy goal, however, you need people to write the software and it's up to the freebsd team(s) to determine if 3d graphics is or is not worthy, isn't it? > This is completely orthogonal to the question of whether people who > express a desire for better support for desktop functionality should > be excoriated publicly on this mailing list, and spanked for having > the audacity to want to migrate from MS Windows to FreeBSD for use as > a desktop OS. > this is a pretty nice list and i haven't found much spanking going on here. > I agree that desktop usage should not take priority over more > fundamental quality concerns in FreeBSD development. Telling people > to stick it in their ear when they say it would be nice to have Flash > support is not related to the ability to prioritize development > goals, though. > i agree that telling people to "stick it in their ear" is not nice, but i don't recall anyone doing so. unfortunately, if i ask for evidence regarding this, you'll probably just tell me to RTFML as you did in your other reply. > Desire for better desktop functionality doesn't have to equate to > wanting desktop-oriented development to "control the reins of > development" for the whole system. Why the hell do you seem to think > it does? > i don't know why you think that's what i think. what i said was that was a concern. i certainly do know that in other areas (computer education for instance), user convenience has destroyed technical know-how (specifically, at some schools when the graphic interface emerged in the 80s, word-processing dominated programming and the some schools lost their thinkers). microsoft's catering to user desires has produced some rather inferior software too. may be it doesn't have to be that way, but often there is a price to be paid for 'convenience'. > Hell, I think the more server-oriented development > philosophy of FreeBSD is actually a big part of the reason it works > so well as a desktop OS! Maintaining a more server-oriented > development philosophy in *no way* precludes giving some attention to > strictly desktop-related functionality, though. > perhaps, but if you have a server-oriented philosophy, why would you give much attention to desktop-related functionality? i recall on the openbsd elist a couple of years ago people asking what wm is best. most of the answers went something like - the default twm (i think that's what it was) or fluxbox was "all i need". > Pretending the two are incompatible goals, as a few notable people > here seem to want to do, is counterproductive in my opinion. > not necessarily. one group is saying we have a great os, so it would be even better if it could accommodate some of the fancy stuff that the kdes and gnomes etc offer even more. the other group is saying why bother, because who really needs it and if they want it they can get it elsewhere. i think the concern of the latter group is by no means illegitimate, because time and resources aren't unlimited. on the otherhand, as i vaguely recall on a flash thread, someone said no one is stopping anyone from writing a better flash for freebsd if they really want to. i think it is ok to ask, but i don't think it is ok to expect. for me, freebsd is a gift and i don't have any expectations from those who put the effort and skill into creating any opensource initiative. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thursday 11 December 2008 19:58:14 Chad Perrin wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 05:00:11PM -0800, prad wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:28:13 -0700 > > > > i don't think that's really what is happening, chad. > > i think there is just some disagreement as to what is considered an > > improvement. > > So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated > graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be considered > a worthy goal? > Not so much considered 'unworthy' as it is a balancing of limited resources. If I was a hardware programmer, had unlimited time, beer, and cheese dip, I'd add everything just because I could. It would be cool if there was a way to ensure that all items would be supported. However, even then, high performance video would lag. It is often proprietary, and many vendors simply won't publish their specs and need a reverse engineer to get any support at all. You can't force them to do it, and in the case of an open source OS, they may not want the world+dog to see their code for any number of reasons. nVidia is a rare exception, and even they are not going to put FreeBSD support at the top of their list. Unless you have a job at some video chipset maker, and are of a truly generous spirit, willing to risk your job in order to publish drivers, it really doesn't matter what priority the powers that be give to video acceleration -- we can't ask anyone to risk their job just so works. If the graphics devices themselves are sub-optimal, getting related systems up to a razor-sharp performance level is like putting nitro and a supercharger in your Lada. You'd have to put it in the back seat, because there's no room in the engine compartment for it. That is also why the high performance fax cards I work with only run on windows machines. (that's gotta be about the greatest number of oxymorons in one sentence -- my brain had two core dumps just parsing it...) Long story short, there's room for all types. Enjoy the diversity. Fix what you can. Avoid the problems you can. Use the appropriate tools for their best purposes. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 18:46:54 -0700 Chad Perrin wrote: > My point exactly -- you rush to his defense, making statements that > seem intended to skewer me for things he has done. I don't consider > that the epitome of fairness. > i'm not trying to skewer you. i only stated that i didn't think it was fair to call him a troll and stated my reasons as to why. > Each time, I have very > clearly stated my disagreement with his estimation of FreeBSD as > being thoroughly beaten by MS Windows in that area, with that URL > provided as evidence to back my claim. > the problem is that is your own posting (http://sob.apotheon.org/?p=335), not that it should automatically be disqualified for that reason. also, the focus seems to specifically on eye-candy: "open source systems are currently better at glitz and glamour than Microsoft and Apple systems". i don't disagree with you that opensource stuff is much better even if they don't have certain things. however, is this really a freebsd issue or a particular version of a desktop that is offered by a unix system. freebsd doesn't offer the most recent versions (and that's not necessarily a bad thing). > Each time, he has completely ignored what I said and the URL I > provided. He keeps coming back to make exactly the same sort of > claims he has before, utterly failing to addresses arguments against > his hand-waving statements without any logical or evidenciary > support. Nobody else has bothered to dispute what I've said, either. > while i would not use xp, somethings do work with less effort there than say ubuntu. there are certain programs like voice recognition that there isn't an equivalent for with opensource, yet. despite this, i certainly try to demonstrate to people why they should use opensource rather than windoze. > In absence of, at *minimum*, some half-assed attempt to make a case > against what I've provided, I will continue to regard his repetition > of disputed, unsupported statements to be dishonest or at least wildly > inaccurate. > i think his arguments go beyond the eye candy realm. he is not alone, you know. i recall reading a few years ago, the creator of the enlightenment wm saying that the desktop war was long lost to windoze. i don't know if that is correct these days, but it certainly seemed so then. > Would you prefer I just accept his statements, which fly in the face > of my own experience, even after he fails to answer supported > disputations of their content, just because it's him and you say he > has to be right about everything? > chad, you are fantasizing now. i never said he has to be right about everything. in fact, i know for certain that he is wrong whenever he disagrees with me. :D i don't think you need to accept his statements. i do think it would be better if we could drop the name calling and the anger, displayed in the earlier posts. if he fails "to answer supported disputations of their content", you can certainly ask him to deal with the matter at hand. > Even if his statement itself isn't dishonest, his unwillingness to > either back away from it or offer a counterargument when it is > effectively disputed is dishonest. He pretends there is no other > side to the matter, no other valid opinion, yet resolutely refuses to > acknowledge such "other side" arguments when they arise. > i find he does answer quite prolifically, but perhaps he may not have addressed your particular issues. > > and as far as 'sticking to the rules', he hasn't abused anyone from > > any of the posts i recall reading, so within the terms of conduct of > > an email list, i don't find your picturesque expression 'crush > > others beneath his heel' legitimate. > > I guess you haven't been reading very closely. > well there are other things to do in life, you know. but i did notice that you called him a troll and possibly a few other things, which i don't think is appropriate for this list which is the freebsd-questions list and not the freebsd-namecalling list. > Oh, poppycock. Go back and read the very post to which I responded > when I called him a troll. Notice how he says things that seem > carefully calculated to make people think "Oh, this FreeBSD thing > obviously sucks as a desktop OS." > i really didn't get that feeling. i think it was more that he doesn't feel desktop paraphernalia is a high priority. > If you want me to speculate, the best I can offer ... [snip] > well you may be right, but i think for now it should simply rest as speculation only. > Nice -- I make a single comment directed at him about his trolling > behavior, and you drag that out into this lengthy back-and-forth -- > and somehow this means I have a vendetta. > well words like "cruel", "sadistic" and "bastard" really compliment the ambiance that the initial "troll" conjured up. i think you may have said things more 'forcefully' than intended, which is why i thought it was sounding rather like a vendetta. > I guess, when you want to > argue a
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 05:00:11PM -0800, prad wrote: > On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:28:13 -0700 > Chad Perrin wrote: > > > Can we stop trying to dissuade people > > from improving FreeBSD, and from advocating for improvements? > > > i don't think that's really what is happening, chad. > i think there is just some disagreement as to what is considered an > improvement. So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be considered a worthy goal? > > > Why does everybody seem > > so eager to assume that FreeBSD isn't, and shouldn't be, a good > > desktop system? > > > from what i see, that isn't the concern. the concern specifically seems > to be twofold: > > 1. that freebsd not lose its integrity in an attempt to support > certain wishes of certain desktop users This is completely orthogonal to the question of whether people who express a desire for better support for desktop functionality should be excoriated publicly on this mailing list, and spanked for having the audacity to want to migrate from MS Windows to FreeBSD for use as a desktop OS. > 2. that desktop usage is possibly not a primary goal and therefore > should not detract from development in the other areas I agree that desktop usage should not take priority over more fundamental quality concerns in FreeBSD development. Telling people to stick it in their ear when they say it would be nice to have Flash support is not related to the ability to prioritize development goals, though. > > i think it is always an excellent idea to "talk hardware vendors into > providing better specs so better drivers can be produced". this is > something the openbsd group also advocated strongly for and it can only > be good for all opensource (assuming it be done properly). however, i > think the concern your opposition has is that the wishes of the desktop > contigent not control the reins of development of an os we all find to > be excellent ... so far. Desire for better desktop functionality doesn't have to equate to wanting desktop-oriented development to "control the reins of development" for the whole system. Why the hell do you seem to think it does? Hell, I think the more server-oriented development philosophy of FreeBSD is actually a big part of the reason it works so well as a desktop OS! Maintaining a more server-oriented development philosophy in *no way* precludes giving some attention to strictly desktop-related functionality, though. Pretending the two are incompatible goals, as a few notable people here seem to want to do, is counterproductive in my opinion. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Alan Perlis: "LISP programmers know the value of everything and the cost of nothing." pgppBS10OuO8A.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 04:47:23PM -0800, prad wrote: > On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:11:25 -0700 > Chad Perrin wrote: > > > His manner of expressing his feelings seems to be to try to crush > > others' beneath his heel. Try examining the definition of the word > > "fair" before you use it in the future. > > > ok, chad, here's what you find on dictionary.com that are relevant: > 1. free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice: a fair decision; a fair > judge. > 2. legitimately sought, pursued, done, given, etc.; proper > under the rules: a fair fight. My point exactly -- you rush to his defense, making statements that seem intended to skewer me for things he has done. I don't consider that the epitome of fairness. > > ok no one is really free from bias when it comes to these things. as > shaw (i think) once wrote "an unbiased opinion isn't worth a damn". > > i do not think you have provided specific evidence that he has been > dishonesty or unjust ... much less so that he has even been incorrect. Let's take, as an example, the link I provided in response to a comment of his that prompted a couple people to defend him. I've given him that URL three or four times in the last year, in direct response to some statement he has made suggesting that FreeBSD desktops simply cannot compare with MS Windows desktops in terms of flashiness, bells and whistles, et cetera. Each time, I have very clearly stated my disagreement with his estimation of FreeBSD as being thoroughly beaten by MS Windows in that area, with that URL provided as evidence to back my claim. Each time, he has completely ignored what I said and the URL I provided. He keeps coming back to make exactly the same sort of claims he has before, utterly failing to addresses arguments against his hand-waving statements without any logical or evidenciary support. Nobody else has bothered to dispute what I've said, either. In absence of, at *minimum*, some half-assed attempt to make a case against what I've provided, I will continue to regard his repetition of disputed, unsupported statements to be dishonest or at least wildly inaccurate. That's generally how *reasonable* people treat hand-waving arguments like his, with no logical or evidenciary support -- nor even personal, anecdotal support -- when they are disputed by a counterargument *with support*. Would you prefer I just accept his statements, which fly in the face of my own experience, even after he fails to answer supported disputations of their content, just because it's him and you say he has to be right about everything? Even if his statement itself isn't dishonest, his unwillingness to either back away from it or offer a counterargument when it is effectively disputed is dishonest. He pretends there is no other side to the matter, no other valid opinion, yet resolutely refuses to acknowledge such "other side" arguments when they arise. I use an example of my own statements only because I'm most familiar with my own statements -- not because others do not exist. > > and as far as 'sticking to the rules', he hasn't abused anyone from > any of the posts i recall reading, so within the terms of conduct of > an email list, i don't find your picturesque expression 'crush others > beneath his heel' legitimate. I guess you haven't been reading very closely. > > > If he just said "If this doesn't suit your needs, try something > > else," I wouldn't have a problem. Telling people patent falsehoods > > about how FreeBSD simply can't do what other OSes can, even in cases > > where FreeBSD can do them *better* than those other OSes, in an > > attempt to drive away anyone that might be looking at FreeBSD as a > > possible migration path, is rather suboptimal in my opinion, however. > > > it would be suboptimal, if it were true. however, i really can't recall > anything of the sort, chad - ever. and certainly not in this thread. i > also don't understand why you think he'd be even motivated to do this. > of what possible interest could it be for him to drive others away from > freebsd? Oh, poppycock. Go back and read the very post to which I responded when I called him a troll. Notice how he says things that seem carefully calculated to make people think "Oh, this FreeBSD thing obviously sucks as a desktop OS." Take off the blinders. I have no idea why he'd be motivated to do that. I'm not him. All I know is what I've seen him do increasingly often over the last year. If you want me to speculate, the best I can offer is that maybe he thinks keeping the community from growing too much will help keep his advice more exceptional within a smaller niche, or perhaps he really does think that good desktop functionality and good server functionality cannot coexist (as he certainly seems to think) -- so driving away anyone that wants to make the move to FreeBSD as a desktop OS might be a good way to keep it improving as a server OS in his mind. In fact, he has as much as said so in the past,
