Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
except when i forgot to unmount - yep, the problem lies here, it's so natural to just unplug an USB device it's so natural to unmount device before removing. at least in unix... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:10:18 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: except when i forgot to unmount - yep, the problem lies here, it's so natural to just unplug an USB device it's so natural to unmount device before removing. at least in unix... On a modern UNIX (like solaris nevada) I don't have to unmount those devices. I just can unplug it and nothing bad happens ;-) -- 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:09:39 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: well - solaris is not that bad. it's unix, you can work on it normally, it's just slow etc... Considering the things the system is doing for me it certainly is not slow. It's a rock-solid UNIX but like sendmail and it's former bugs and security hazards, a bad name does not go away easy. People tend to repeat eachother for a very long time. Slowaris is one of those terms. -- 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 17:10 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: except when i forgot to unmount - yep, the problem lies here, it's so natural to just unplug an USB device it's so natural to unmount device before removing. at least in unix... true too .. :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 16:23:04 +0100, Julien Cigar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: you may pkg_add from ftp repository of course .. too bad that there is no pkg_upgrade You can use: portupgrade -PP pkgname This will only use pre-compiled packages to upgrade. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Quoting Julien Cigar jci...@ulb.ac.be: On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 15:56 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: - on almost all my machines I have problems with CD/DVD drives, mostly things like READ_BIG timeout, etc. I tried almost everything (disabling ACPI, DMA, upgrading the drive BIOS, etc), disabling DMA resolved some problems, but it's still impossible to burn a DVD for example. i don't have. i use only atapicam+cd driver, no acd. Of course I tried atapicam too (I even removed acd totally from the kernel), but it doesn't resolve the problem(s) I assume that you made the recommended links en /etc/devfs.conf etc. so I won't go into it but it has been literally years that I haven't had an issue burning cd's or dvd's be it music, movies, OS's built here or elsewhere. I've just recently started trusting all my burning to k3b because I like the music for success after finishing the burn. ;) It works on all my different machines, even a cheapy acer laptop with dvdrw. As I said, I've not seen it NOT work on any and all cheap hardware in a long, long time. I guess maybe I'm just lucky. ed P.S. The only thing that doesn't work on my cheapy laptop is the crystal eye webcam but I think that even the linux crowd is having issues with it plus I'm too old to want to send my video. - my mouse (a Logitec MX 300, USB) is still undetected at boot. Every time I have to unplug/plug it after boot. Not a big deal I admit, but boring. - USB mass storage plug/unplug sometimes causes system panic. I know never got such thing, except when i forgot to unmount except when i forgot to unmount - yep, the problem lies here, it's so natural to just unplug an USB device that this is a well known bug that require some rearchitecting and that a proper umount has always been the way to umount a drive, but, honestly, you cannot seriously convince someone to use FreeBSD with things like this ... - 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 there are packages, but it's far less friendly to use (and manage) than apt-get/dpkg. you may pkg_add from ftp repository of course .. too bad that there is no pkg_upgrade -- 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 ___ 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 Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:51:22 +1000 Da Rock rock_on_the_...@comcen.com.au wrote: The possibility here is the bells and whistles strangely enough DO work in tune and without sore lips... FreeBSD could be THAT good. i'm not so sure that is really THAT good. bells and whistles if not carefully thought out and implemented can add to instability. possibly more important, they can pervert the original good idea. i think the newer kde's is a case in point (from my personal experience, albeit). version 3 was good (despite the occasional crash). version 4 seemed to try to do all sorts of stuff and outdo windoze at being windoze. i'm using dwm :D i think this issue was dealt with rather well in the openbsd faq: - 1.10 - Can I use OpenBSD as a desktop system? This question is often asked in exactly this manner -- with no explanation of what the asker means by desktop. The only person who can answer that question is you, as it depends on what your needs and expectations are. While OpenBSD has a great reputation as a server operating system, it can be and is used on the desktop. Many desktop applications are available through packages and ports. As with all operating system decisions, the question is: can it do the job you desire in the way you wish? You must answer this question for yourself. http://openbsd.org/faq/faq1.html#Desktop - while i agree with you as far as having suitable driver accessibility, i don't see why one system needs to try to be all things to all people. -- 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 Thu 11 Dec 2008 at 10:37:42 PST prad wrote: while i agree with you as far as having suitable driver accessibility, i don't see why one system needs to try to be all things to all people. I agree. But if FreeBSD isn't trying to be all things to all people, the implication is that it IS trying to be only some things to only some people. Looking at http://www.freebsd.org/about.html and the links therefrom, I don't see anything narrowing down who those some people are or what the some things might be which FreeBSD is aiming to provide to them. In fact, http://www.freebsd.org/applications.html seems to suggest that ordinary desktop users are among the target audience. There we see FreeBSD recommended, not only to service providers and sysadmins, but also to software developers, students and researchers, internet surfers, and even game players. The impression I get from the website is that FreeBSD is indeed trying to be all things to all people. Did I miss something? ___ 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, Dec 11, 2008 at 12:44:23PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: that's the most narrow minded post i've seen here since i'm on this group or your narrow mail reading . As if the only work that can be considered real work is the work you do... The reason why I CAN'T do any serious work on FreeBSD is because it lacks the NVidia drivers (i'm in the film/commercial industry). it's not bells and whistles but drivers. Your whole bells and whistles line of BS started with your assertion that we don't even need fully functional NVIDIA drivers, though. You seem to think that there's no legitimate use for 3D accelerated graphics, for some reason -- and yes, that's pretty damned narrow-minded. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Anonymous quoth: Blind faith is an ironic gift to return to the Creator of human intelligence. pgprtZ4ltc7IQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 12:28:00PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
The possibility here is the bells and whistles strangely enough DO work
in tune and without sore lips... FreeBSD could be THAT good.
in bells and whistles windows is best. for those who require it paying a
bit for windows is not a problem.
Those who need to do actual work, we have FreeBSD for example
Bullshit:
http://sob.apotheon.org/?p=335
Please stop trolling.
--
Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]
print substr('Just another Perl hacker', 0, -2);
pgprWauSDqJsx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 02:40:06PM +0100, Julien Cigar wrote: Just to share my point of view : I use FreeBSD only since 6.2, before that I was a long-time Debian user. For the little experience I have with it I must admit that it looks pretty solid and a perfect choice for a server (for proof: I replaced almost all my Debian boxes with FreeBSD, both at work and at home) : That very closely mirrors my own experience; I too moved from long-time Debian GNU/Linux use to FreeBSD circa 6.2. I have no regrets. - on almost all my machines I have problems with CD/DVD drives, mostly things like READ_BIG timeout, etc. I tried almost everything (disabling ACPI, DMA, upgrading the drive BIOS, etc), disabling DMA resolved some problems, but it's still impossible to burn a DVD for example. That boggles my mind -- but then, I remember having even worse problems with the hardware interface to the optical disk drive in a ThinkPad T43 at one point when using Debian GNU/Linux, so I suppose it's not unprecedented. I suspect it's an issue with some nonstandard hardware interface that hasn't been resolved yet. - my mouse (a Logitec MX 300, USB) is still undetected at boot. Every time I have to unplug/plug it after boot. Not a big deal I admit, but boring. I'm surprised to hear you have that issue. Are you, perhaps, using an older version of FreeBSD -- and might this be something fixed in newer releases? I'm just curious, because my experience has been quite the opposite; my mouse and keyboard experience with FreeBSD has actually been better than with Debian GNU/Linux and MS Windows in the past. - USB mass storage plug/unplug sometimes causes system panic. I know that this is a well known bug that require some rearchitecting and that a proper umount has always been the way to umount a drive, but, honestly, you cannot seriously convince someone to use FreeBSD with things like this ... This is actually supposed to be fixed by Tomasz Napierala, with an estimated project completion date of February 2009, according to this announcement: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-announce/2008-November/001214.html - 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 there are packages, but it's far less friendly to use (and manage) than apt-get/dpkg. I'd like to see management of packages made simpler and easier, without package management getting any further diverged from ports management of course. The unification of package and port management is kind of a must-have feature in my opinion, but surely something can be done about making installing and upgrading from packages simpler and easier without further damaging that unification. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Edmund Burke: Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgement; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion. pgp3mtM0tFET6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 11:09:51 -0800 Charlie Kester corky1...@comcast.net wrote: The impression I get from the website is that FreeBSD is indeed trying to be all things to all people. Did I miss something? charlie, i think the point of that page is indicated here: Here are some examples of the environments in which FreeBSD is used these are examples of freebsd's versatility, which is not the same as saying freebsd is ubiquitously versatile. admittedly the stuff in red: FreeBSD is an operating system that will grow with your needs. could be interpreted as the all things to all people and i think does may be make a case for providing 'more', but i think that's something best left to be explained by the people at the helm of the ship. and the key point is perhaps right here: FreeBSD users are quite proud of not only how fast but how reliable their systems are. so whatever else, i think this statement is certainly something we can all agree on. -- 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
While OpenBSD has a great reputation as a server operating system, it for whom? ;) it's just overadvertised nothing more, having no adventage over FreeBSD in any point. ___ 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
Please stop trolling. having different opinion than yours isn't trolling. and i WILL NOT stop writing my opinions just because your is different. ___ 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, Dec 11, 2008 at 06:38:30PM +0300, Ole wrote: Also you can use portupgrade -PP -PP --use-packages-onlyNever use the port even if a package is not avail- able either locally or remotely, although you still have to keep your ports tree up-to-date so that portupgrade can check out what the latest version of each port is. In in some cases re-compiling it better then package usage. For example you may wish for GnomeVFS support by OO, or drop GNOME support and KDE support instead. This function sets in configure by program author and when you working with ports you can play this options I'd love to drop GNOME and KDE support for OO.o, but on my laptop I really don't have the resources to spare for compiling OO.o, so I live with whatever's in the package. Such is life. Actually, I'd love to drop OO.o too, but I haven't gained the level of familiarity with LaTeX yet to do the things I do with OO.o when making invoices. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Sterling Camden: The Church doesn't want people calling for inquisitions. pgpP3lQP7pmxQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
instead. This function sets in configure by program author and when you working with ports you can play this options I'd love to drop GNOME and KDE support for OO.o, but on my laptop I really don't have the resources to spare for compiling OO.o, so I live with whatever's in the package. Such is life. simply make your own package somewhere and then use pkg_add ___ 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, Dec 11, 2008 at 08:32:20PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: Please stop trolling. having different opinion than yours isn't trolling. and i WILL NOT stop writing my opinions just because your is different. It's not just that you have a different opinion than me -- it's that every time someone brings up anything related to migration from some other OS to FreeBSD, you basically tell them to go away. This is unproductive, leads to endless argument on the mailing list, and generally makes everyone unhappy. That sounds suspiciously like trolling to me. -- 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? pgpKDRypnRgN7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu 11 Dec 2008 at 11:32:57 PST prad wrote: charlie, i think the point of that page is indicated here: Here are some examples of the environments in which FreeBSD is used these are examples of freebsd's versatility, which is not the same as saying freebsd is ubiquitously versatile. admittedly the stuff in red: FreeBSD is an operating system that will grow with your needs. could be interpreted as the all things to all people and i think does may be make a case for providing 'more', but i think that's something best left to be explained by the people at the helm of the ship. I was searching for a statement of FreeBSD's *goals* and came away with the impression that it's trying to be a general-purpose operating system. Goals are one thing. How much progress you've made toward meeting your goals is another. This thread has been about some things FreeBSD still needs to do in order to meet what do seem to be, after all, some of its goals. Wojciech seems to be denying that FreeBSD has any such goals that require these changes. But his argument implies that FreeBSD is some kind of special-purpose OS with a limited target audience. I don't think that interpretation is supported by the way FreeBSD is presented on its own website. But I admit, I'm still rather new to FreeBSD. Perhaps I've misunderstood what it's all about. So I'll leave my question about its goals as one for the more experienced members of the list to answer. If I've got it wrong, I hope they'll correct me. and the key point is perhaps right here: FreeBSD users are quite proud of not only how fast but how reliable their systems are. so whatever else, i think this statement is certainly something we can all agree on. Yes, I wholeheartedly agree. I don't ever want the speed or reliability of the OS to be compromised by anything that is done to meet its remaining goals. ___ 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 13:55:04 Chad Perrin wrote: On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 08:32:20PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: Please stop trolling. having different opinion than yours isn't trolling. and i WILL NOT stop writing my opinions just because your is different. It's not just that you have a different opinion than me -- it's that every time someone brings up anything related to migration from some other OS to FreeBSD, you basically tell them to go away. This is unproductive, leads to endless argument on the mailing list, and generally makes everyone unhappy. That sounds suspiciously like trolling to me. In Wojciech's defense, he is technically skilled, has found use for FreeBSD, and spends his time on the mailing list answering questions. I enjoy his opinions, and if FreeBSD ever needed a BOFH, he'd be my first choice. Not to say that he knows everything about everything -- that's my Ex's job. The answers he gives are somewhat abrupt and definitely coloured by his experiences and ego -- if you want your hand held, he is not your guy. However, he has valid points, and isn't trolling. It's just who he is. It's a cultural thing, and his input is valuable enough that I don't filter him out or stir him up. If you recall, on the mailing list, there are cautions not to waste people's time with FAQ questions due to the response they may get, and from what I've seen over time, the people on the list have been kind and gone well beyond the 'RTFM' answer I'd have given most inquiries if it was up to me. I guess what I'm saying is that Wojciech acts well within the expected guidelines on the list, and if you don't like his answers, you certainly are not obligated to respond. I don't respond to 99% of his responses, but I am seeing a dogpile coming on, and I'm not so sure that's a good idea. If we want FreeBSD to grow to where vendors pick up obscure and not-so-obscure devices and support it more than it is now, we need publicity. If we need publicity, we need marketing types. If we need marketing types, we need to pay them, and we need to put up with them, and even be nice to them. I'm not so sure I want to pay that price. As it stands right now, it's a meritocracy -- those with the skills share their work with others with the skills. It is bound together by the respect we have for each other, and there's not much name-calling going on. The product is technically sound, has better hardware support than other *ixes (I run OpenBSD on servers -- but not on the laptop beause of the lack of laptop support), and gets the job done well. The documentation is simply phenomenal. I'm good with that. I'm also more than pleased that there are barriers to entry based upon a basic unix knowledge level -- I've had one too many encounters with the unwashed to want to go that direction. Linux developers spend more time catering to that crowd, and IMO, it suffers for it as much as it benefits from it. If someone wants to commercialize FreeBSD, they are welcome to do so within the terms of the license -- the more the merrier. But asking the list to hand-hold is a bit much -- we're adults here with real jobs that we should be doing. Getting an opinion from a person with skills isn't such a bad thing, and I think the list benefits from his knowledge. To be completely honest, I'd rather get the right information from a person who cannot relate than no answer at all from people who are more friendly. ___ 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
Tyson Boellstorff wrote: On Thursday 11 December 2008 13:55:04 Chad Perrin wrote: On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 08:32:20PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: Please stop trolling. having different opinion than yours isn't trolling. and i WILL NOT stop writing my opinions just because your is different. It's not just that you have a different opinion than me -- it's that every time someone brings up anything related to migration from some other OS to FreeBSD, you basically tell them to go away. This is unproductive, leads to endless argument on the mailing list, and generally makes everyone unhappy. That sounds suspiciously like trolling to me. In Wojciech's defense, he is technically skilled, has found use for FreeBSD, and spends his time on the mailing list answering questions. I enjoy his opinions, and if FreeBSD ever needed a BOFH, he'd be my first choice. Not to say that he knows everything about everything -- that's my Ex's job. The answers he gives are somewhat abrupt and definitely coloured by his experiences and ego -- if you want your hand held, he is not your guy. However, he has valid points, and isn't trolling. It's just who he is. It's a cultural thing, and his input is valuable enough that I don't filter him out or stir him up. If you recall, on the mailing list, there are cautions not to waste people's time with FAQ questions due to the response they may get, and from what I've seen over time, the people on the list have been kind and gone well beyond the 'RTFM' answer I'd have given most inquiries if it was up to me. I guess what I'm saying is that Wojciech acts well within the expected guidelines on the list, and if you don't like his answers, you certainly are not obligated to respond. I don't respond to 99% of his responses, but I am seeing a dogpile coming on, and I'm not so sure that's a good idea. If we want FreeBSD to grow to where vendors pick up obscure and not-so-obscure devices and support it more than it is now, we need publicity. If we need publicity, we need marketing types. If we need marketing types, we need to pay them, and we need to put up with them, and even be nice to them. I'm not so sure I want to pay that price. As it stands right now, it's a meritocracy -- those with the skills share their work with others with the skills. It is bound together by the respect we have for each other, and there's not much name-calling going on. The product is technically sound, has better hardware support than other *ixes (I run OpenBSD on servers -- but not on the laptop beause of the lack of laptop support), and gets the job done well. The documentation is simply phenomenal. I'm good with that. I'm also more than pleased that there are barriers to entry based upon a basic unix knowledge level -- I've had one too many encounters with the unwashed to want to go that direction. Linux developers spend more time catering to that crowd, and IMO, it suffers for it as much as it benefits from it. If someone wants to commercialize FreeBSD, they are welcome to do so within the terms of the license -- the more the merrier. But asking the list to hand-hold is a bit much -- we're adults here with real jobs that we should be doing. Getting an opinion from a person with skills isn't such a bad thing, and I think the list benefits from his knowledge. To be completely honest, I'd rather get the right information from a person who cannot relate than no answer at all from people who are more friendly. I agree. nothing wrong with his posts. the mailing list was never described as a warm, social gather. you want answers, and you get them here. i for one would rather him be abrupt and short. no need for the pomp and circumstance. ___ 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
Thursday, 11 December 2008 at 12:28:00 +0100, Wojciech Puchar said: The possibility here is the bells and whistles strangely enough DO work in tune and without sore lips... FreeBSD could be THAT good. in bells and whistles windows is best. for those who require it paying a bit for windows is not a problem. Well, I've been using FreeBSD for my main desktop since 4.6.2. I'm currently running 7.1-PRERELEASE on a Dell laptop where everything works except the modem. I'm typing this whilst listening to the BBC radio through the iplayer on the net in Firefox (mplayer plugin). I can connect my Palm TX and Ipod without problem when I need to. My removable drives are automatically mounted and unmounted using the thunar volume manager under Xfce. Personally, I don't see the issue with FreeBSD on the desktop - unless you need flash or nvidia graphics on amd64 (which I don't). But I suppose YMMV. Regards, Peter Harrison. Those who need to do actual work, we have FreeBSD for example ___ 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 Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:12:19 -0700 Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: Please stop trolling. chad, i don't think this is fair to wojciech. he is expressing his feelings and considerable knowledge about an os that he doesn't want to go the way of certain others. i find he writes concisely and backs up his statements. nor do i think there is anything wrong with the concept that if you don't find what you're looking for here, look elsewhere. that's not 'driving people away'. that's encouraging them to figure out what they want and get it where it is available - which is precisely what he and many others have done by going to freebsd. -- 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 Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:20:23 -0800 Charlie Kester corky1...@comcast.net wrote: Goals are one thing. How much progress you've made toward meeting your goals is another. This thread has been about some things FreeBSD still needs to do in order to meet what do seem to be, after all, some of its goals. true, but goals are not carved in stone - and that might be exactly what wojciech is worried about. i remember reading one of his posts long ago where he pleaded that freebsd not stop being freebsd. Wojciech seems to be denying that FreeBSD has any such goals that require these changes. But his argument implies that FreeBSD is some kind of special-purpose OS with a limited target audience. I don't think that interpretation is supported by the way FreeBSD is presented on its own website. well yes and no. if you look on the features page: http://www.freebsd.org/features.html you can perhaps get a clearer picture of 'goals' (though they aren't as precisely stated perhaps as http://openbsd.org/goals.html). for instance: No matter what the application, you want your system's resources performing at their full potential. FreeBSD's focus on performance, networking, and storage combine with easy system administration and excellent documentation to allow you to do just that. so performance, networking (and presumably serving), storage, administration and documentation would seem to be major matters of concern. looking further we see: ... As a result, FreeBSD may be found across the Internet, in the operating system of core router products, running root name servers, hosting major web sites, and as the foundation for widely used desktop operating systems. so this would seem to clarify specific uses. the last bit about desktops is certainly true - freebsd is an excellent foundation for any desktop use, but that doesn't necessarily mean you get all the goodies thrown in. further: FreeBSD provides advanced operating system features, making it ideal across a range of systems, from embedded environments to high-end multiprocessor servers. possibly the word 'ideal' can suggest the 'all things to all people' notion, but possibly it only means that it does really well in pretty much all situation, but not denying that another os may do better for a specific situation. i have a vague recollection from the past that freebsd felt they had erred with version 5 in that they tried to do too much too soon resulting in 5 not being as good as 4 (particularly 4.7, i think). this is really an area of major concern from a philosophical perspective. in an interview with a german magazine many years ago, bill gates plainly stated that microsoft wasn't too interested in fixing bugs. they were far more interested in providing the stuff the customers want. while that might seem to some like good business sense, it assumes that the 'customer is always right' (which is really another way of saying that the customer is always ripe for the picking). i don't think that's where we'd want freebsd to go. -- 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 Thu, 11 Dec 2008 20:30:32 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: for whom? ;) it's just overadvertised nothing more, ya well i'm not trying to do their advertising :D :D i merely copied it from their page. we did use openbsd for 1 yr for our servers and it was ok though some of the default security was irritating (for us). their elist wasn't nearly as good as this one and had some rather perpetually-angry-at-each-other people on it though there was one fantastic guy (nick holland) who was really knowledgeable and helpful to everyone. the real problem we had with openbsd was that the email system became unstable after doing the upgrades to the next version using their recommended upgrade process. in fact, the recommended upgrade process didn't work on when we tried to go to 4.1 for some of the software, which is really pretty weird. openbsd wants you to upgrade. what was surprising and refreshing here was to hear more than one person (and i think you were one of them), say why upgrade if the system is doing the job you want it to. so i'm not upgrading our servers because everything is working absolutely beautifully! having no adventage over FreeBSD in any point. well i thought the 3.9 fish was kinda cute, but beastie is still much better! -- 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
Let me jump in again here. On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 13:46:22 -0800, prad p...@towardsfreedom.com wrote: so performance, networking (and presumably serving), storage, administration and documentation would seem to be major matters of concern. That's a valid point. I definitely don't want to see these things changing. Because I have to administer and to program on FreeBSD, I enjoy (!) the excellent documentation. Everything is there, from system binaries, configuration files, maintenance procedures, system calls and kernel interfaces. Just look into the Linux world - you don't find this fine quality there very often. It seems to develop into a common habit that documentation is to be done by the users and to be published in Wikis and web forums. Personally, I prefer the old fashioned man command. Furthermore, FreeBSD's source code is written in a very good manner: tidy and self-explaining. The administration of the FreeBSD OS is, due to its good documentation, very easy. You can use editors as you wish, or add GUI frontends. But you don't have to if you feel that you work faster without all the pomp and pipes, turn and whistle. :-) There are no stupid programs that know better than you and then break your configuration. so this would seem to clarify specific uses. the last bit about desktops is certainly true - freebsd is an excellent foundation for any desktop use, but that doesn't necessarily mean you get all the goodies thrown in. I can't complain - FreeBSD-only desktop since 4.0 without problems. possibly the word 'ideal' can suggest the 'all things to all people' notion, but possibly it only means that it does really well in pretty much all situation, but not denying that another os may do better for a specific situation. As it has been adviced before, FreeBSD may not be a solution to a specific problem. But those who use FreeBSD are usually intelligent enough to look at other places where an OS might exist that will do what they want, instead of being ignorant and expecting someone to write the missing stuff for them for free. In Germany, we have the term eierlegende Wollmilchsau (egg- laying wool-milk-sow) for something that tries to please everyone's expectations, a kind of all imaginable purposes devices to be used by everyone. Definitely, FreeBSD isn't such a device, but it doesn't try to be. Where purposes increase, quality usually decreases. I do see this, for example, in KDE's bad internationalisation (here, the German one); I always would prefer a system that is written in good english than one that is written in bad German and with english error messages. in an interview with a german magazine many years ago, bill gates plainly stated that microsoft wasn't too interested in fixing bugs. they were far more interested in providing the stuff the customers want. MICROS~1's customers want bugs, they get bugs because they paid for them. :-) while that might seem to some like good business sense, it assumes that the 'customer is always right' (which is really another way of saying that the customer is always ripe for the picking). Hm, interesting point of view. Another idea would be the following slogan: Don't give them what they want, give them what they need. This implies that the customer often doesn't know what he needs. I see this concept in action every day. Sometimes, people are plain stupid, but their expectations are high as a mountain. You give them computing power not imaginable 10 years ago, and they treat their system like a worse typewriter and start complaining that it doesn't read their mind... i don't think that's where we'd want freebsd to go. Personally, I would say so, or we'll end up here: http://www.rinkworks.com/stupid/ I do read along there when I feel sad or angry. Maybe this page helps you, too. :-) -- Polytropon From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ 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 14:03:13 -0800, prad p...@towardsfreedom.com wrote: well i thought the 3.9 fish was kinda cute, but beastie is still much better! Yes, it is. =^_^= --- http://www.spilth.org/pictures/girls/ceren/ -- Polytropon From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ 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
things changing. Because I have to administer and to program on FreeBSD, I enjoy (!) the excellent documentation. Everything is there, from system binaries, configuration files, maintenance procedures, system calls and kernel interfaces. Just look into i fully agree with you the Linux world - you don't find this fine quality there very often. It seems to develop into a common habit that documentation in linux: man command this manual is no longer maintained. try info, google or wiki. maybe you will find your documentation, maybe not. --- it's one of things that make linux unusable for me. The administration of the FreeBSD OS is, due to its good documentation, very easy. and due to clear config files, not linux-like mess. it's really clear and easy. ___ 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 23:06:35 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: in linux: man command this manual is no longer maintained. try info, google or wiki. maybe you will find your documentation, maybe not. Or try this with third party software on FreeBSD, for example with KDE and its applications. In opposite, see the manpages of XMMS, MPlayer, WindowMaker, even Opera... just to name a few; it shows that it's possible to have good documentation, even for third party software on FreeBSD, but it seems that not all projects intend to do so, and that's sad. -- Polytropon From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ 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
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 ___ 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 23:03:24 +0100 Polytropon free...@edvax.de wrote: In Germany, we have the term eierlegende Wollmilchsau (egg- laying wool-milk-sow) that is indeed a great term! MICROS~1's customers want bugs, they get bugs because they paid for them. :-) :D may be the mac people can use your line here in one of their commercials :D You give them computing power not imaginable 10 years ago, and they treat their system like a worse typewriter and start complaining that it doesn't read their mind... it's really fascinating, isn't it!! Personally, I would say so, or we'll end up here: http://www.rinkworks.com/stupid/ I do read along there when I feel sad or angry. Maybe this page helps you, too. :-) i am fortunate in that i don't get sad or angry, but do like reading about other perspectives that a situation may inspire, such as this one from the site you recommend: Tech Support: What version of Windows do you have installed? Customer: ... Double glazed. there really are some true gems on that site, so i'm going to pass it on to others ... the only problem is that some of those others may have done exactly some of those things that are on that site. :D :D -- 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 Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 08:46:36PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: instead. This function sets in configure by program author and when you working with ports you can play this options I'd love to drop GNOME and KDE support for OO.o, but on my laptop I really don't have the resources to spare for compiling OO.o, so I live with whatever's in the package. Such is life. simply make your own package somewhere and then use pkg_add Sometimes, that isn't an option. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Georg Hackl: American beer is the first successful attempt at diluting water. pgplTAIp46Vx5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 15:44:06 -0800, prad p...@towardsfreedom.com wrote: may be the mac people can use your line here in one of their commercials :D But only if Mac OS X supports 8.3 filenames. :-) You give them computing power not imaginable 10 years ago, and they treat their system like a worse typewriter and start complaining that it doesn't read their mind... it's really fascinating, isn't it!! It's even more fascinating if you realized that there are people really thinking this way, without any joke. The computer has to know what I want, and if it doesn't, it's worthless crap. Tech Support: What version of Windows do you have installed? Customer: ... Double glazed. From the Operating systems page: Tech Support: May I ask what operating system you are running today? Customer: A computer. Sure. :-) there really are some true gems on that site, so i'm going to pass it on to others ... For example Why should I pay you to work on my computer? the only problem is that some of those others may have done exactly some of those things that are on that site. :D :D The 4X cup holder woman, Miss Backup or Mr. Modem? :-) Yeah, I know, Computer Stupidities is great, and it's no scarry fiction (SF). Finally (or first?) note the words of Charles Babbage, presented on the main page: On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Polytropon From Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ 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, Dec 11, 2008 at 04:23:03PM -0500, michael wrote: I agree. nothing wrong with his posts. the mailing list was never described as a warm, social gather. you want answers, and you get them here. i for one would rather him be abrupt and short. no need for the pomp and circumstance. I have no problem with honest abruptness. What I do have a problem with is patently absurd statements about the superiority of MS Windows for classes of uses for which it is *not* superior, and the claim that such classes of use are somehow bad or unworthy. I'm also rather annoyed by the fact that he persists in making such patently absurd statements in an effort to scare off anyone who might actually become a contributing member of the FreeBSD community even after someone has provided evidence to the contrary -- and seems to make it a policy to utterly ignore any evidence that contradicts his own narrow view of the world so he *can* persist in being a fork in the eye for anyone that is interested in FreeBSD but hasn't yet really gotten familiar with it. There's a big difference between people who ask RTFM-worthy questions and people who ask *good* questions that don't measure up to his standards of someone who should use FreeBSD. I'm tired of reading shit about how anything that could stand to be improved in FreeBSD is just catering to people who are better off using MS Windows instead, about how anyone using MS Windows should just stay in Microsoft's world and never bother trying to improve their computing environments, and so on. When someone other than him elects to be helpful, his interjections a dozen posts into a thread about how the person asking the question should just fuck off and die, and MS Windows is better anyway, are pretty damned counterproductive. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Marvin Minsky: . . . anyone could learn Lisp in 1 day, except that if they already knew Fortran, it would take 3 days. pgp5Ucwjyt5tU.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 01:24:19PM -0800, prad wrote: On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 12:12:19 -0700 Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote: Please stop trolling. chad, i don't think this is fair to wojciech. he is expressing his feelings and considerable knowledge about an os that he doesn't want to go the way of certain others. i find he writes concisely and backs up his statements. 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. nor do i think there is anything wrong with the concept that if you don't find what you're looking for here, look elsewhere. that's not 'driving people away'. that's encouraging them to figure out what they want and get it where it is available - which is precisely what he and many others have done by going to freebsd. 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. You talk about how many people have gone where they can get what they want by migrating to FreeBSD, completely ignoring the fact that about half a dozen times in the last year (wild guess on frequency) he has done his level best to dissuade people from even finding out whether FreeBSD is where they can get what they want. What kind of cruel, sadistic bastard tries so hard to prevent people from bettering their circumstances like that? -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Larry Wall: Perl is, in intent, a cleaned up and summarized version of that wonderful semi-natural language known as 'Unix'. pgp0aWBszyB8X.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 01:46:22PM -0800, prad wrote: looking further we see: ... As a result, FreeBSD may be found across the Internet, in the operating system of core router products, running root name servers, hosting major web sites, and as the foundation for widely used desktop operating systems. so this would seem to clarify specific uses. the last bit about desktops is certainly true - freebsd is an excellent foundation for any desktop use, but that doesn't necessarily mean you get all the goodies thrown in. Indeed. FreeBSD is, in terms of its architecture and design philosophy, the best desktop system I've ever used. I would like it to continue to improve as a desktop system -- and, as such, I am vehemently opposed to anyone that suggests that for desktop bells and whistles everybody should just fuck off to Microsoft-land. I certainly don't want to sacrifice the things that make FreeBSD great, not only for servers but for my laptop as well. We don't have to sacrifice those things to improve support for common desktop task functionality such as better 3D accelerated graphics support. My mind boggles at the protestations I see against improving such support. Refusing to support such things will not make FreeBSD better: it will only make FreeBSD more limited. Can we stop trying to dissuade people from improving FreeBSD, and from advocating for improvements? I don't see any reason we can't try to talk hardware vendors into providing better specs so better drivers can be produced, nor any reason we can't welcome people who want to use Compiz Fusion and run currently popular games on their FreeBSD desktops into the community. We don't have to adopt Ubuntu's sudo-only administrative model, decide bugs aren't important to fix, or adopt a more monolithic approach to system design that would reduce the performance and stability of FreeBSD, in order to work on better driver support and desktop usability. in an interview with a german magazine many years ago, bill gates plainly stated that microsoft wasn't too interested in fixing bugs. they were far more interested in providing the stuff the customers want. while that might seem to some like good business sense, it assumes that the 'customer is always right' (which is really another way of saying that the customer is always ripe for the picking). i don't think that's where we'd want freebsd to go. I certainly don't want FreeBSD to go there -- but that's not the same as wanting FreeBSD to offer better support for common desktop functionality like 3D accelerated graphics. Why does everybody seem so eager to assume that FreeBSD isn't, and shouldn't be, a good desktop system? -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Paul Graham: SUVs are gross because they're the solution to a gross problem. (How to make minivans look more masculine.) pgpPe1YHrzhpY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:11:25 -0700 Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com 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. 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. 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. 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? You talk about how many people have gone where they can get what they want by migrating to FreeBSD, completely ignoring the fact that about half a dozen times in the last year (wild guess on frequency) he has done his level best to dissuade people from even finding out whether FreeBSD is where they can get what they want. perhaps i haven't read those specific posts. if they really do exist and are legitimate beyond your own personal vendetta (which it is seeming to have become for some reason now), could you point me there? What kind of cruel, sadistic bastard tries so hard to prevent people from bettering their circumstances like that? !!??!! chad, have you recently tried examining the definition of the word troll as it pertains to usage on an elist? you have your wishes for freebsd and he has his. they are different, but they don't need to lead to name calling and war. if you don't agree with what he says, then just post your disagreement with backup. he can do the same. may be you'll convince each other - may be you won't. -- 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 Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:28:13 -0700 Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com 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. 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 2. that desktop usage is possibly not a primary goal and therefore should not detract from development in the other areas 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. -- 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 Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 04:47:23PM -0800, prad wrote: On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:11:25 -0700 Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com 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, though not in so many words.
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 per...@apotheon.com 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, 11 Dec 2008 18:46:54 -0700 Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com 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 against someone, it helps if you can manufacture
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 foo 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 foo 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 18:58:14 -0700 Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com 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 Sun, 2008-12-07 at 08:29 -0500, Jerry wrote: snip IMHO, before FreeBSD can make a significant market share improvement, it has to improve its hardware support. NVidia, for one, has expressed a desire to support FreeBSD; however, it needs the FreeBSD organization to improve its basic product, especially in the 64-bit systems, which are the future of computing. Ok. So what needs improvement and where to start? Not being critical, I'm interested in this. Personally though, I think the business model here is a failure and seriously flawed. And yes, I did study business at Monash (and butted heads constantly; IF you don't look out for the health and well being of a community, environment, employees, whatever- the extreme social responsibility- then the clients and potential clients die, ergo no customers therefore no money to be made. Thats looking after your bottomline: Duh!) and saw this continually. Marketing the same; appealing to all markets is extremely lucrative, and with the technology literally at our fingertips can be very easy to do. So why not just pull the finger out and do it instead of saying its too hard, too much trouble, etc. Old people at the wheel stuck on old ways and refusing to budge (no offense intended to those on the list- I have a lot of respect for those in technology; strangely the inverse is true- they actually know what they're doing and do it properly the first time) in management. Sorry for the rant, but that's just my 2c. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Hello ! It would be desirable to learn from experienced users OS - why FreeBSD does not concern the category serious systems at the overwhelming majority of manufacturers of hardware. More recently there were times when anybody from manufacturers did not notice Linux. However now it is possible to find a few companies who does not write drivers Linux for the products. Has really problem only in small user-base? More recently for example I addressed in a support service of one very large company who making a servers. The question has been connected with incorrectly working equipment. When me have asked Whats there OS on harware and having received answer FreeBSD, they have given out put normal OS - their list is at us on a site and then we will respond on yours ticked. It is very strange to hear similar things if to consider that by data netcraft and to other sources of information FreeBSD is the favourite at a number of large organisations ISP. It seems to me vendors are afraid of that FreeBSD has stable Core no structure. And if the constant collective of the developers working for the paid standard working days of 5 days in week has been generated - who would give support FreeBSD - people would concern serious OS and they would not have a feeling of incomprehensibility about the future and perspectivity FreeBSD. The salary to these programmers can be collected through donations or - perhaps to let out the commercial project on the basis of FreeBSD - for example the complete well adjusted distribution kit for servers or desktop - as PCBSD command does. And it is still possible - somewhere to publish base loyal vendors - good and evil in relation to FreeBSD. In number good to bring those who by own strength accompanies FreeBSD drivers the equipment. For example I know from such - 3Ware letting out controllers. Nvidia graphics card for i386. I very much love FreeBSD as OS, but unfortunately people have no correct representation about it. Where the truth. Thanks WBR! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
manufacturers of hardware. More recently there were times when anybody from because managers/bosses concentrate on majority, not minority of users. manufacturers did not notice Linux. However now it is possible to find a few given out put normal OS - their list is at us on a site and then we will i recommend you to find normal shop to buy hardware, that allow you to fully test computer before buying. if you think there are larger (even hundreds means larger) start selling FreeBSD compatible computers in your area! You could make money on that, many people will easily spend 100$ more for computer that is already tested 100% FreeBSD compatible. All you have to do is to test/check lots of different parts of hardware if it actually work with FreeBSD fine, and make computers from that parts. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 09:40:46 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: manufacturers of hardware. More recently there were times when anybody from because managers/bosses concentrate on majority, not minority of users. That is plain good business sense. As Willy Sutton once remarked to a reporter, Mitch Ohnstad, who asked why he robbed banks by saying, because that's where the money is. manufacturers did not notice Linux. However now it is possible to find a few given out put normal OS - their list is at us on a site and then we will i recommend you to find normal shop to buy hardware, that allow you to fully test computer before buying. Obvious, if you are buying a custom built unit. Maybe, even if you buying a generic unit. if you think there are larger (even hundreds means larger) start selling FreeBSD compatible computers in your area! You could make money on that, many people will easily spend 100$ more for computer that is already tested 100% FreeBSD compatible. All you have to do is to test/check lots of different parts of hardware if it actually work with FreeBSD fine, and make computers from that parts. The problem with the business design is what do you do if a customer wants a specific hardware device that FreeBSD does not support. The changes of that happening in Linux are much less, and with Windows, virtually never at all. IMHO, before FreeBSD can make a significant market share improvement, it has to improve its hardware support. NVidia, for one, has expressed a desire to support FreeBSD; however, it needs the FreeBSD organization to improve its basic product, especially in the 64-bit systems, which are the future of computing. -- Jerry [EMAIL PROTECTED] There are ten or twenty basic truths, and life is the process of discovering them over and over and over. David Nichols signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
NVidia, for one, has expressed a desire to support FreeBSD; however, it needs the FreeBSD organization to improve its basic product, especially in the 64-bit systems, which are the future of computing. Does anyone know of any recent progress on a 64bit Nvidia Driver? there is mention of progress on this page http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=41545page=24 Sam Fourman Jr. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Does anyone know of any recent progress on a 64bit Nvidia Driver? there is mention of progress on this page http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=41545page=24 most freebsd users don't need 3D at all, or don't need super-high-speed 3D. so simply don't use nvidia/ati ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
If only 3D or super-high-speed has been affected by this driver. Regrettably most application simple is not usable, like video-players, google-earth, KDE4 - all of that on my desktop station with 4Gb of RAM is looksworks like nightmare in vesa (xorg nv)-driver. And me too a very long time waiting for news from NV/BSD team. On Sunday 07 December 2008 21:18:08 Wojciech Puchar wrote: Does anyone know of any recent progress on a 64bit Nvidia Driver? there is mention of progress on this page http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=41545page=24 most freebsd users don't need 3D at all, or don't need super-high-speed 3D. so simply don't use nvidia/ati ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On 12/7/08, Ole Vole [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If only 3D or super-high-speed has been affected by this driver. Regrettably most application simple is not usable, like video-players, google-earth, KDE4 - all of that on my desktop station with 4Gb of RAM is looksworks like nightmare in vesa (xorg nv)-driver. And me too a very long time waiting for news from NV/BSD team. Simple solution: Pay them or someone to do it for you, or hack it yourself, or wait for it little longer. -- Paul ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 08:29:32AM -0500, Jerry wrote: IMHO, before FreeBSD can make a significant market share improvement, it has to improve its hardware support. NVidia, for one, has expressed a desire to support FreeBSD; however, it needs the FreeBSD organization to improve its basic product, especially in the 64-bit systems, which are the future of computing. Please explain your use of the word improve in this context. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Mediocrity corrupts. Bureaucracy corrupts absolutely. pgpI1UyKLlAty.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 07:18:08PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: most freebsd users don't need 3D at all, or don't need super-high-speed 3D. Who is most freebsd users? I agree that there are more important things to worry about than nvidia/amd64 support, but: if you want to buy a computer these days and want to use it as a desktop/workstation with our favourite operating system, you have a serious problem to find a graphics card that is both useable and buyable. so simply don't use nvidia/ati Ok, what else then? Uwe ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, Dec 07, 2008 at 07:18:08PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: Does anyone know of any recent progress on a 64bit Nvidia Driver? there is mention of progress on this page http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=41545page=24 most freebsd users don't need 3D at all, or don't need super-high-speed 3D. so simply don't use nvidia/ati That strikes me as short-sighted, narrow-minded, and self-fulfilling. 1. As long as there is not as much support for 3D accelerated graphics with FreeBSD, people who need 3D accelerated graphics will tend to use other OSes more often. 2. The fact that you apparently have some kind of zealous hatred of the idea of FreeBSD on the desktop doesn't mean there are not legitimate uses for FreeBSD on the desktop -- uses that may even include things like 3D accelerated graphics. Hell, I get better performance for WoW using Wine than I do on MS Windows. 3. There are uses for 3D accelerated graphics that don't even include desktop use. Rendering farms come to mind. The more you say Most FreeBSD users don't need 3D at all, so just use something else if you need 3D, and sweep the problem under the rug, the more likely we are to never have a FreeBSD that offers broad, stable support for 3D accelerated graphics. I would like it if you'd stop trying to convince people that my favorite OS shouldn't be improved. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Henry Spencer: Those who don't understand Unix are doomed to reinvent it, poorly. pgppp00o6muqI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, 7 Dec 2008 20:35:17 +0100 Uwe Laverenz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Who is most freebsd users? i would think most are interested in running servers or routers or possible scientific applications or engaged in os study and appreciate its simplicity and consistency. i don't think it can compete with linux in terms of some of the bells and whistles that the desktop offers, but imho, a lot of those bells ring out of tune and the whistles result in sore lips. -- 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Paul B. Mahol writes: Simple solution: Pay them or someone to do it for you, or hack it yourself, or wait for it little longer. Given nVidia has offered to write and maintain a driver ... if we're going this route, the correct solution is to pay someone to make the changes nVidia wants in the kernel. I don't understznd the vm system, but it's possible others might find those improvements useful as well. I'm not prepared to spec the project or organize the contributions; I _would_ probably be willing to make a donation. Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Bruce Cran wrote: On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:04:51 -0500 michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bob McConnell wrote: 2. Do an SMB mount of remote directories onto the desktop or your home directory. Open any application and access files in that directory as easily as when they are on the local drive. [...] also, my vlc sees any mounted drive or directory, no matter the protocol. so does mplayer, etc. i don't know why your system doesn't operate correctly, but i don't have that issue at all. e,g: /mnt/Azureus Downloads this mount is mounted over samba from a computer on the other side of the house, and i see everything on it and play my files over the network. But it doesn't work if you use Places - Connect to Server - the share appears on the Desktop as though it's mounted, but you have to realise that it's actually a GVFS mount, not a kernel-level mount. So only Gnome applications which know about GVFS are able to see the files. yeah.. i don't use that. mine are mounted with smbfs. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 01:25:24PM -0500, Bob McConnell wrote: On Behalf Of Chad Perrin While I agree that, without some kind of supporting argument, the statement that Linux systems are low end Unix replacements are kind of spurious sounding, I don't think that market share is really an effective metric for determination of the quality of a replacement for a given class of OS. I believe that he forgot to reference this article from ServerWatch. This shows more than a marginal increase in market share. It suggests that Sun and others have good reason to be nervous about their future prospects, and need to find new ways to make money. http://www.serverwatch.com/eur/article.php/3787586 Market share is still not an effective metric for determination of the quality of a replacement for a given class of OS. Your statements and the article to which you linked in no way contradict what I said. Even though the article whose URL you provided does talk about Linux suitability for certain tasks traditionally handled by commercial UNIX systems, market share itself is not a very effective metric except, perhaps, by accident -- because growing market share can indicate any of a number of different potential causes. On the other hand, both Unix and Linux have a long way to go before they can match Microsoft's ease of use on the GUI. I believe the best way to attack that problem is to find a new paradigm to replace the desktop, which is not a great interface model to begin with. I guess that depends on your definition of ease of use. In my little world, ease of use involves the ease, efficiency, and speed of task completion via an interface with which I'm familiar. It seems from what you said that in your little world ease of use means familiarity, since that's really the major win for MS Windows interfaces, to the majority of its users. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Friedrich Nietzche: Those who know that they are profound strive for clarity. Those who would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity. pgpKqmFGb4VEh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 07:39:39PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: unix is not windows replacements. all of these GUI overlays for which that much noise is heard are not just overlays, but are poorly designed even more poorly than windows. Windows is poorly designed too but at least it's somehow complete. What are you -- a troll? -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Larry Wall: Perl is, in intent, a cleaned up and summarized version of that wonderful semi-natural language known as 'Unix'. pgpnKFz2J6TBm.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Behalf Of Chad Perrin On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 01:25:24PM -0500, Bob McConnell wrote: On Behalf Of Chad Perrin On the other hand, both Unix and Linux have a long way to go before they can match Microsoft's ease of use on the GUI. I believe the best way to attack that problem is to find a new paradigm to replace the desktop, which is not a great interface model to begin with. I guess that depends on your definition of ease of use. In my little world, ease of use involves the ease, efficiency, and speed of task completion via an interface with which I'm familiar. It seems from what you said that in your little world ease of use means familiarity, since that's really the major win for MS Windows interfaces, to the majority of its users. Here are two simple tests for ease of use. 1. View a tree of files and directories, some local some remote mounts. Highlight a random group of those objects. Move the entire group in one motion by dragging and dropping the collection to a new location in the tree. 2. Do an SMB mount of remote directories onto the desktop or your home directory. Open any application and access files in that directory as easily as when they are on the local drive. I have not been able to do either of these on Ubuntu 7.10 or XFCE/Slackware 12. In the first case, I need to cut and paste the individual files one at a time. I can't even move a directory. In the second, I have been unable to get Amarok, vlc, xine or any other multimedia application I have tried, to recognize the SMB mounted directory. It is invisible to them. At the application level there should be absolutely no difference between a local drive and a mounted remote drive, no matter what protocol was used to mount it. The application should not need to implement smb:// itself. I am not even going to talk about how difficult it is to find and modify basic configuration files, particularly after the LSB crowd really screwed everything up. Once you fix basic problems like these, then we can talk about how to redefine ease of use. Bob McConnell ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Bob McConnell wrote: On Behalf Of Chad Perrin On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 01:25:24PM -0500, Bob McConnell wrote: On Behalf Of Chad Perrin On the other hand, both Unix and Linux have a long way to go before they can match Microsoft's ease of use on the GUI. I believe the best way to attack that problem is to find a new paradigm to replace the desktop, which is not a great interface model to begin with. I guess that depends on your definition of ease of use. In my little world, ease of use involves the ease, efficiency, and speed of task completion via an interface with which I'm familiar. It seems from what you said that in your little world ease of use means familiarity, since that's really the major win for MS Windows interfaces, to the majority of its users. Here are two simple tests for ease of use. 1. View a tree of files and directories, some local some remote mounts. Highlight a random group of those objects. Move the entire group in one motion by dragging and dropping the collection to a new location in the tree. 2. Do an SMB mount of remote directories onto the desktop or your home directory. Open any application and access files in that directory as easily as when they are on the local drive. I have not been able to do either of these on Ubuntu 7.10 or XFCE/Slackware 12. In the first case, I need to cut and paste the individual files one at a time. I can't even move a directory. In the second, I have been unable to get Amarok, vlc, xine or any other multimedia application I have tried, to recognize the SMB mounted directory. It is invisible to them. At the application level there should be absolutely no difference between a local drive and a mounted remote drive, no matter what protocol was used to mount it. The application should not need to implement smb:// itself. I am not even going to talk about how difficult it is to find and modify basic configuration files, particularly after the LSB crowd really screwed everything up. Once you fix basic problems like these, then we can talk about how to redefine ease of use. Bob McConnell ease of use is always relative to the person using. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Bob McConnell wrote: On Behalf Of Chad Perrin On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 01:25:24PM -0500, Bob McConnell wrote: On Behalf Of Chad Perrin On the other hand, both Unix and Linux have a long way to go before they can match Microsoft's ease of use on the GUI. I believe the best way to attack that problem is to find a new paradigm to replace the desktop, which is not a great interface model to begin with. I guess that depends on your definition of ease of use. In my little world, ease of use involves the ease, efficiency, and speed of task completion via an interface with which I'm familiar. It seems from what you said that in your little world ease of use means familiarity, since that's really the major win for MS Windows interfaces, to the majority of its users. Here are two simple tests for ease of use. 1. View a tree of files and directories, some local some remote mounts. Highlight a random group of those objects. Move the entire group in one motion by dragging and dropping the collection to a new location in the tree. 2. Do an SMB mount of remote directories onto the desktop or your home directory. Open any application and access files in that directory as easily as when they are on the local drive. I have not been able to do either of these on Ubuntu 7.10 or XFCE/Slackware 12. In the first case, I need to cut and paste the individual files one at a time. I can't even move a directory. In the second, I have been unable to get Amarok, vlc, xine or any other multimedia application I have tried, to recognize the SMB mounted directory. It is invisible to them. At the application level there should be absolutely no difference between a local drive and a mounted remote drive, no matter what protocol was used to mount it. The application should not need to implement smb:// itself. I am not even going to talk about how difficult it is to find and modify basic configuration files, particularly after the LSB crowd really screwed everything up. Once you fix basic problems like these, then we can talk about how to redefine ease of use. Bob McConnell also, my vlc sees any mounted drive or directory, no matter the protocol. so does mplayer, etc. i don't know why your system doesn't operate correctly, but i don't have that issue at all. e,g: /mnt/Azureus Downloads this mount is mounted over samba from a computer on the other side of the house, and i see everything on it and play my files over the network. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 01:41:43PM -0500, Bob McConnell wrote: On Behalf Of Chad Perrin On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 01:25:24PM -0500, Bob McConnell wrote: On Behalf Of Chad Perrin On the other hand, both Unix and Linux have a long way to go before they can match Microsoft's ease of use on the GUI. I believe the best way to attack that problem is to find a new paradigm to replace the desktop, which is not a great interface model to begin with. I guess that depends on your definition of ease of use. In my little world, ease of use involves the ease, efficiency, and speed of task completion via an interface with which I'm familiar. It seems from what you said that in your little world ease of use means familiarity, since that's really the major win for MS Windows interfaces, to the majority of its users. Here are two simple tests for ease of use. 1. View a tree of files and directories, some local some remote mounts. Highlight a random group of those objects. Move the entire group in one motion by dragging and dropping the collection to a new location in the tree. That's easy. Actually easier with just a simple mv command. Who cares about drag and drop. That is harder. 2. Do an SMB mount of remote directories onto the desktop or your home directory. Open any application and access files in that directory as easily as when they are on the local drive. Works fine around here. jerry I have not been able to do either of these on Ubuntu 7.10 or XFCE/Slackware 12. In the first case, I need to cut and paste the individual files one at a time. I can't even move a directory. In the second, I have been unable to get Amarok, vlc, xine or any other multimedia application I have tried, to recognize the SMB mounted directory. It is invisible to them. At the application level there should be absolutely no difference between a local drive and a mounted remote drive, no matter what protocol was used to mount it. The application should not need to implement smb:// itself. I am not even going to talk about how difficult it is to find and modify basic configuration files, particularly after the LSB crowd really screwed everything up. Once you fix basic problems like these, then we can talk about how to redefine ease of use. Bob McConnell ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Once you fix basic problems like these, then we can talk about how to redefine ease of use. Bob McConnell ease of use is always relative to the person using. Ease of use is also relative to the training investment. In X, a moderate investment some 20-odd years ago still pays, even through the evolvement of interfaces like KDE, which follows the same general structure. With certain other commercial products, you get to learn it again, and again, and again. What I've had to re-learn to support Windows 1.1, 2.0. 3.0. 3.11, 95, NT, ME, 2000, XP, and Vista has changed dramtically over the years, and they're not done making it usable for the lowest common denominator yet, especially when you throw in de-enhancements like (un)FriendlyTree, a.k.a. Where the @[EMAIL PROTECTED] are my files?!?!?!. This is why I can easily justify teaching my elders FreeBSD -- they unquestionably have more to learn, but they only learn it once, so the investment pays off. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
This is why I can easily justify teaching my elders FreeBSD -- they unquestionably have more to learn, but they only learn it once, so the investment pays off. but most people don't like to learn. even once. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Tyson Boellstorff wrote: Once you fix basic problems like these, then we can talk about how to redefine ease of use. Bob McConnell ease of use is always relative to the person using. Ease of use is also relative to the training investment. In X, a moderate investment some 20-odd years ago still pays, even through the evolvement of interfaces like KDE, which follows the same general structure. With certain other commercial products, you get to learn it again, and again, and again. What I've had to re-learn to support Windows 1.1, 2.0. 3.0. 3.11, 95, NT, ME, 2000, XP, and Vista has changed dramtically over the years, and they're not done making it usable for the lowest common denominator yet, especially when you throw in de-enhancements like (un)FriendlyTree, a.k.a. Where the @[EMAIL PROTECTED] are my files?!?!?!. This is why I can easily justify teaching my elders FreeBSD -- they unquestionably have more to learn, but they only learn it once, so the investment pays off. you basically lengthened what i said. :-) also, using classic menus from xp and up looks like win95 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 08:23:49PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: This is why I can easily justify teaching my elders FreeBSD -- they unquestionably have more to learn, but they only learn it once, so the investment pays off. but most people don't like to learn. even once. You need to begin speaking for yourself rather than that reluctant expert character called Most People. You seem to do quite well working out issues that you encounter in your work, but everytime you start quoting this Most People guy you seem to get lost in the weeds. Let Most People speak for himself and deal with his own problems. FreeBSD has done quite well and developed an excellent product when people applied themselves to create solutions for the problems they were actually having and allowed Most People to do the same with his issues. jerry ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:04:51 -0500 michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bob McConnell wrote: 2. Do an SMB mount of remote directories onto the desktop or your home directory. Open any application and access files in that directory as easily as when they are on the local drive. [...] also, my vlc sees any mounted drive or directory, no matter the protocol. so does mplayer, etc. i don't know why your system doesn't operate correctly, but i don't have that issue at all. e,g: /mnt/Azureus Downloads this mount is mounted over samba from a computer on the other side of the house, and i see everything on it and play my files over the network. But it doesn't work if you use Places - Connect to Server - the share appears on the Desktop as though it's mounted, but you have to realise that it's actually a GVFS mount, not a kernel-level mount. So only Gnome applications which know about GVFS are able to see the files. -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Behalf Of Chad Perrin On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 04:53:03PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Your assertion that linux is both low end unix and low end windows replacement is factually wrong: As a high end unix I think it's earned it's stripes, currently dominating the top 500 supercomputer systems in the world, some no other unix has managed to accomplish this time round. Notably, when compared to freebsd it offers support for virtualisation where bsd is nowhere close to doing, just one example of high end unix feature it provides. As a gui desktop, I'm certain kde is a superior interface to windows in many ways. While I agree that, without some kind of supporting argument, the statement that Linux systems are low end Unix replacements are kind of spurious sounding, I don't think that market share is really an effective metric for determination of the quality of a replacement for a given class of OS. I believe that he forgot to reference this article from ServerWatch. This shows more than a marginal increase in market share. It suggests that Sun and others have good reason to be nervous about their future prospects, and need to find new ways to make money. http://www.serverwatch.com/eur/article.php/3787586 On the other hand, both Unix and Linux have a long way to go before they can match Microsoft's ease of use on the GUI. I believe the best way to attack that problem is to find a new paradigm to replace the desktop, which is not a great interface model to begin with. Bob McConnell If a messy desk is the sign of a cluttered mind, what is an empty desk the sign of? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: FreeBSD and hardware??
This shows more than a marginal increase in market share. It suggests that Sun and others have good reason to be nervous about their future prospects, and need to find new ways to make money. there is no sense of buying Sun hardware. they make excellent hardware but with more than excellent price, and their unix is damn slow compared to FreeBSD. http://www.serverwatch.com/eur/article.php/3787586 On the other hand, both Unix and Linux have a long way to go before they can match Microsoft's ease of use on the GUI. I believe the best way unix is not windows replacements. all of these GUI overlays for which that much noise is heard are not just overlays, but are poorly designed even more poorly than windows. Windows is poorly designed too but at least it's somehow complete. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 19:39:39 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: there is no sense of buying Sun hardware. they make excellent hardware but with more than excellent price You are right about that. The quality is very high; prices are too. and their unix is damn slow compared to FreeBSD. These kinds of personal (subjective) remarks are FUD if you don't deliver the test results. -- 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 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 04:53:03PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (Forgive the top-posting) Why? Your assertion that linux is both low end unix and low end windows replacement is factually wrong: As a high end unix I think it's earned it's stripes, currently dominating the top 500 supercomputer systems in the world, some no other unix has managed to accomplish this time round. Notably, when compared to freebsd it offers support for virtualisation where bsd is nowhere close to doing, just one example of high end unix feature it provides. As a gui desktop, I'm certain kde is a superior interface to windows in many ways. While I agree that, without some kind of supporting argument, the statement that Linux systems are low end Unix replacements are kind of spurious sounding, I don't think that market share is really an effective metric for determination of the quality of a replacement for a given class of OS. I'm also not sure I see how virtualization makes or breaks the quality of any Unix-like system, or qualifies it as high end. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ] Zat was zen, dis is tao. http://tao.apotheon.org pgpat2uiW7mAn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 15:40:09 +0100, Manfred Usselmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just a small example, how limited Windows really is: Even today it is not possible to configure the standard interface of Windows XP (Luna) in any other color than blue, olive green and silver. LOL. Not to mention that 90% of the programs that run on Windows use their own 'theme engine', completely bypassing and making worthless *everything* that may seem 'familiar' about the Windows GUI. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
(Forgive the top-posting) Your assertion that linux is both low end unix and low end windows replacement is factually wrong: As a high end unix I think it's earned it's stripes, currently dominating the top 500 supercomputer systems in the world, some no other unix has managed to accomplish this time round. Notably, when compared to freebsd it offers support for virtualisation where bsd is nowhere close to doing, just one example of high end unix feature it provides. As a gui desktop, I'm certain kde is a superior interface to windows in many ways. Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you! -Original Message- From: Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:18:13 To: Zbigniew Szalbot[EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD and hardware?? usage or need. You seem to be reserving FBSD only for the experts. I wouldn't be here is someone that simply use unix an expert? no. By constantly repeating that UNIX is no Windows replacement you are and i will repeat it because it's true. it's every other unix replacement. as linux tries for many years to be windows replacement - it's both low end unix and low end windows replacement, windows for poor. not a nice future for FreeBSD IMHO. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
I think the fundamental problem with the Windows UI is that it's trying to cater for both advanced (e.g Shutdown, Restart, Sleep, Hibernate or well funny - that being able to restart is being advanced user. good to know. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 10:07:14 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think the fundamental problem with the Windows UI is that it's trying to cater for both advanced (e.g Shutdown, Restart, Sleep, Hibernate or well funny - that being able to restart is being advanced user. good to know. Actually, I think it is. See http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2006/11/21.html for the reasoning. -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
hardware compatibility question: intel e7200 + foxconn g31mg-s mobo
After having been burned with an AMD cpu/mobo combination that wouldn't run 6.x reliabably which I consequently had to sell, I'm going to ask first. My search of the archives (questions and hardware) came up empty, but that seems likely given that both say their archive index was last updated clear back in Feb of 2007, despite the note saying they are updated every 24 hours... Can anyone vouch for running 6.x or 7.0 on an intel e7200 with a foxconn g31mg-s mobo? I was hoping to run this as a low power system but after reading this http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=18410+20569+/usr/local/www/db/text/2008/freebsd-hardware/20080727.freebsd-hardware and my past experiences I'm a bit concerned unless someone can vouch for it. Barring that, can someone suggest a low power (particularly when idle) core 2 duo processor mobo combination? Thanks, Gary ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
I have read briefly on FreeBSD and it seems to be the winner on speed and stability versus Linux and of course MS Windows. versus linux - of course, versus windows - it's different OS, we should define how do you compare. for example running windows apps under FreeBSD with wine will probably be slower than under windows. As your laptop was probably sold with windows, request it's manufacturer/reseller to fix the problems or give it back, and buy another better supported. Anyway, how about you plus Google cash, and others (?), putting a simple easy partition of MS hard disks and FreeBSD install with a nice GUI. And getting Google to distribute it to the World. My question is, how much once again i repeat - FreeBSD is not windows replacement. it's unix. All nice GUI for unices turned to be bad idea, every windows user will say it's poor compared to windows. and they are right. it will be very nice if someone/some company produce true windows compatible OS, running windows programs, windows installers, but being much better and faster. of course - they could reuse lots of FreeBSD code, like device drivers for example and graphics modules from Xorg. FreeBSD is very good in hardware support now, with most of drivers being very stable and high performance. for now there is no such thing, except ReactOS which is in early alpha state. hardware can you produce drivers for. Presumbably Apple Mac OSX have most of the hardware drivers, so can you?? Mac OSX reused lots of unix code, mostly FreeBSD AFAIK, + everything by it's own. it could be seen as a competitor for M$ Windows, if it's better or not i don't know, i don't use both. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
If you're thinking of trying out FreeBSD, then this is the right place to come. A word of warning though: it's not at all like Windows, or even MacOSX. You will be expected to learn quite a bit about the low level MacOSX can run unix programs, but in every other respect is not like unix as you said. nitty-gritty of the OS in order to achieve the best results. Of course, the best results are very good indeed, and in my humble opinion, well worth the effort required. Installing on laptop type hardware is a tricky proposition: it's very much luck of the draw whether your particular model has sufficient driver support For FreeBSD supported laptops Lenovo as generally good choice. Of course others may work too. It's best to go to the shop and run LiveCD, check dmesg to see if everything is detected, check if it works, and then buy/not buy. But yes - laptops have very often strange/nonstandard hardware. Driver support really is the kicker in all of this. Apple MacOSX doesn't have this problem, since it only runs on Apple proprietary hardware. If the AFAIK it can be run on ordinary PC with simple patches. just because todays Apple hardware are just ordinary PCs, just with 2-3 times higher price ;) Even if Apple does have a driver for a piece of kit not already supported in FreeBSD, it cannot be assumed that Apple will automatically donate the code to the FreeBSD project. BTW are there any drivers in FreeBSD source tree that was written by Apple? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tuesday 18 November 2008 12:27:42 Wojciech Puchar wrote: If you're thinking of trying out FreeBSD, then this is the right place to come. A word of warning though: it's not at all like Windows, or even MacOSX. You will be expected to learn quite a bit about the low level MacOSX can run unix programs, but in every other respect is not like unix as you said. nitty-gritty of the OS in order to achieve the best results. Of course, the best results are very good indeed, and in my humble opinion, well worth the effort required. Installing on laptop type hardware is a tricky proposition: it's very much luck of the draw whether your particular model has sufficient driver support For FreeBSD supported laptops Lenovo as generally good choice. Not anymore. They were when it was still IBM. Some in-depth discussion here: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-mobile/2008-July/010831.html And of course, there's: http://www.ixsystems.com/products/bsd-laptop.html -- Mel Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules and never get to the software part. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:23:24PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar typed: once again i repeat - FreeBSD is not windows replacement. it's unix. All nice GUI for unices turned to be bad idea, every windows user will say it's poor compared to windows. and they are right. I totally disagree. Please note that your *opinion* doesn't become truth, even when you keep repeating it over and over. there's a whole spectrum of window/desktop environments to choose from for every conceivable usage or need. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Hi, On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 13:31, Ruben de Groot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 12:23:24PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar typed: once again i repeat - FreeBSD is not windows replacement. it's unix. All nice GUI for unices turned to be bad idea, every windows user will say it's poor compared to windows. and they are right. I totally disagree. Please note that your *opinion* doesn't become truth, even when you keep repeating it over and over. there's a whole spectrum of window/desktop environments to choose from for every conceivable usage or need. You seem to be reserving FBSD only for the experts. I wouldn't be here using this great OS if it had been you I met in the first place. Fortuantely, there were very kind people here who helped me make first steps into the world of UNIX and then continued supporting me along the way. By constantly repeating that UNIX is no Windows replacement you are only discouraging fresh blood from entering the system. It is true that the system has steep learning curve but it is not an elite system for the chosen few. Contrary to what you think, the more people use it, the more chance we get of (for example) hardware producers making FBSD drivers. So please stop discouraging people from using it. Please. -- Zbigniew Szalbot ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
All nice GUI for unices turned to be bad idea, every windows user will say it's poor compared to windows. and they are right. I totally disagree. Please note that your *opinion* doesn't become truth, i exactly repeat opinion of LOTS of windoze users that tried any unix GUI. it's poor mans windows. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
usage or need. You seem to be reserving FBSD only for the experts. I wouldn't be here is someone that simply use unix an expert? no. By constantly repeating that UNIX is no Windows replacement you are and i will repeat it because it's true. it's every other unix replacement. as linux tries for many years to be windows replacement - it's both low end unix and low end windows replacement, windows for poor. not a nice future for FreeBSD IMHO. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
For FreeBSD supported laptops Lenovo as generally good choice. Not anymore. They were when it was still IBM. Some in-depth discussion here: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-mobile/2008-July/010831.html thanks for info. it was really on place as i told someone yesterday. fortunately he didn't yet buy laptop And of course, there's: http://www.ixsystems.com/products/bsd-laptop.html very expensive. some lower end model (in addition to that) would be nice. FreeBSD isn't slow, so in most cases much less powerful and cheaper do fine. i understand good part of the price is because it's made quite resistant physically. anyway - if i will like to buy NEW laptop and someone will sell it in Poland i would buy this. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:18:13 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: usage or need. You seem to be reserving FBSD only for the experts. I wouldn't be here is someone that simply use unix an expert? no. By constantly repeating that UNIX is no Windows replacement you are and i will repeat it because it's true. it's every other unix replacement. as linux tries for many years to be windows replacement - it's both low end unix and low end windows replacement, windows for poor. This is nonsense. The Windows interface itself is quite limited and not very powerful. Compared e.g. with the old OS/2 desktop, which was really powerful, flexible (and object oriented). How disappointed I was when Win/95 came out being an OS/2 user at that time. From what I have read even the user interface of Mac OS X is much better that Windows although they have a much smaller market share. Anyhow, of course you can fully replace Windows with a unix(-like) system and a suitable desktop enviroment (e.g. KDE, Gnome, XFCE). It depends on your specific requirements and if applications exist which do what you need. But saying that GUI's under Unix are per se inferior is just spreading FUD. Leave that to MS. ;-) Just a small example, how limited Windows really is: Even today it is not possible to configure the standard interface of Windows XP (Luna) in any other color than blue, olive green and silver. LOL. The only advantage Windows has is that many people are used to it. -- Manfred Usselmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
This is nonsense. The Windows interface itself is quite limited and not very powerful. as KDE and Gnome and others. when Win/95 came out being an OS/2 user at that time. From what I have read even the user interface of Mac OS X is much better that Windows although they have a much smaller market share. so why it have a much smaller market share? Anyhow, of course you can fully replace Windows with a unix(-like) system and a suitable desktop enviroment (e.g. KDE, Gnome, XFCE). It depends on your specific requirements and if applications exist which do what you need. But saying that GUI's under Unix are per se inferior is just spreading FUD. Leave that to MS. ;-) after being one of sponsors of easy linux distributions and desktop environment (RedHat), microsoft now can say the truth that it's crap. Just a small example, how limited Windows really is: Even today it is you don't have to tell me this. as all unix desktop environments are. because this style of computing is limited by general. In technical university nearest me there was (or is) a guy that when teaching students unix he said: --- Don't use windows. Not because it crashes, not because it's buggy and not because it's damn slow. But because it learns bad habits, that are then almost impossible to get rid of. For me the best sentence about it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 03:40:09PM +0100, Manfred Usselmann wrote: On Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:18:13 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: usage or need. You seem to be reserving FBSD only for the experts. I wouldn't be here is someone that simply use unix an expert? no. By constantly repeating that UNIX is no Windows replacement you are and i will repeat it because it's true. it's every other unix replacement. as linux tries for many years to be windows replacement - it's both low end unix and low end windows replacement, windows for poor. This is nonsense. The Windows interface itself is quite limited and not very powerful. Compared e.g. with the old OS/2 desktop, which was really powerful, flexible (and object oriented). How disappointed I was when Win/95 came out being an OS/2 user at that time. From what I have read even the user interface of Mac OS X is much better that Windows although they have a much smaller market share. Anyhow, of course you can fully replace Windows with a unix(-like) system and a suitable desktop enviroment (e.g. KDE, Gnome, XFCE). It depends on your specific requirements and if applications exist which do what you need. But saying that GUI's under Unix are per se inferior is just spreading FUD. Leave that to MS. ;-) Just a small example, how limited Windows really is: Even today it is not possible to configure the standard interface of Windows XP (Luna) in any other color than blue, olive green and silver. LOL. The only advantage Windows has is that many people are used to it. I am one of the few UNIX administrators who prefers to use Windows (XP or 2K; cannot stand Vista) as a desktop/workstation operating system. If we really want to talk about all the reasons why I abhor X, we can discuss them some other time, because ultimately they don't (and shouldn't) matter. Why? Because each person should conclude what works best for them, depending upon whatever their needs are. I have a lot of reasons for loathing X. A *lot*. I've spent a lot of time (and even money; anyone remember AccelX back in the 90s? Yep, I bought it) trying to adapt over the years, and I cannot. I'm not going to provide details because it'll just induce more parking lot burn-outs and that's not what I want. Comparatively: I have co-workers who love X and KDE, and hate Windows -- and I have co-workers who absolutely love OS X's GUI, and hate X and Windows. (In fact, the few OS X users I know get quite irate when they find some OS X program actually relies on X11). The only time I curse Windows is when CMD.EXE or command-line utilities come into play. Anyone who's used *IX will know what I mean by this. PowerShell/Monad is a joke, Cygwin is an atrocity, 4NT/4DOS is too quirky, and *IX application ports often have too many bugs (either not handling NTFS filenames correctly (resorting to 8.3 format), or having filesize limitations due to the porter doing it wrong; 2GB limits are found in common programs including Win32 wget). Every operating system/GUI/environment has its share of quirks. It just depends on which ones you can tolerate. I can tolerate some of Windows' quirks (sans focus stealing, although I'm told KDE applicationg are starting down this road too), but cannot with X or OS X. I suppose it's because I've a mental stigma; I associate *IX and UNIX with servers, and I likely always will. *IX/UNIX on the desktop is a crazy idea to me. That's all I have to say on the matter; I won't reply here on out. -- | Jeremy Chadwickjdc at parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, USA | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP: 4BD6C0CB | ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 8:49 AM, Wojciech Puchar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is nonsense. The Windows interface itself is quite limited and not very powerful. as KDE and Gnome and others. GUI's (and operating systems) should be evaluated by user type. For many, the command line is limiting. For others, it is limitless. when Win/95 came out being an OS/2 user at that time. From what I have read even the user interface of Mac OS X is much better that Windows although they have a much smaller market share. so why it have a much smaller market share? This is a big question that goes down many roads, including monopolistic practices, effective marketing and the fact that Apple controls both their OS and hardware, which made it less competitive for many years. Better does not always mean success in the marketplace. One of the best examples of this is OS/2. When I first started learning about Linux (FreeBSD came later), I read many messages from older IT veterans that if OS/2 had succeeded, they would have no need for Linux. Andrew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Wojciech Puchar([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.18 12:23:24 +0100: FreeBSD is very good in hardware support now, with most of drivers being very stable and high performance. for now there is no such thing, except ReactOS which is in early alpha state. Have you used, erm... Linux? Both Linux and FreeBSD run pretty much at hardware level. You benchmark either, you'll get very close results in speed and scalability. Both are well optimized. Unix is for servers, Windoze/OSX is for clients. They're much better clients than Unix. Cut and paste still doesn't work well in Unix GUIs. Think about that. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
I am one of the few UNIX administrators who prefers to use Windows (XP or 2K; cannot stand Vista) as a desktop/workstation operating system. if you need really windows-like computing/desktop-environments/whatever is called they RIGHT - windows is most windows like and it's good choice. bought it) trying to adapt over the years, and I cannot. I'm not going so you made the right decision. but i think you use your windows through some NAT equipment/server when logging to your unix servers, or your passwords will quickly be compromissed ;) Comparatively: I have co-workers who love X and KDE, and hate Windows -- i don't like any of them, because i can't concentrate on the actual work with them. but not hate. hate in that context is nonsense. The only time I curse Windows is when CMD.EXE or command-line utilities windows CMD is a joke. simply. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Have you used, erm... Linux? Both Linux and FreeBSD run pretty much at hardware level. You benchmark either, you'll get very close results in for benchmarks doing same thing over and over, or same thing in parallel linux can even be better. but try running many different tasks in parallel under linux. FreeBSD flies, while linux chokes. that's why i don't like benchmarks. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Wojciech Puchar([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.18 16:51:16 +0100: Have you used, erm... Linux? Both Linux and FreeBSD run pretty much at hardware level. You benchmark either, you'll get very close results in for benchmarks doing same thing over and over, or same thing in parallel linux can even be better. but try running many different tasks in parallel under linux. FreeBSD flies, while linux chokes. Can you point out some places on the web that confirm this? that's why i don't like benchmarks. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 02:16:37PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar typed: All nice GUI for unices turned to be bad idea, every windows user will say it's poor compared to windows. and they are right. I totally disagree. Please note that your *opinion* doesn't become truth, i exactly repeat opinion of LOTS of windoze users that tried any unix GUI. And you fail miserably at noticing a single opinion of any unix user here who works happily in a (mostly) GUI environment. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 02:18:13PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: usage or need. You seem to be reserving FBSD only for the experts. I wouldn't be here is someone that simply use unix an expert? no. By constantly repeating that UNIX is no Windows replacement you are and i will repeat it because it's true. it's every other unix replacement. Time to forget this.It is a semantic and religious battle playing hair splitting games with words.It is not a MS clone but it is an MS replacement. If you overwrite your MS-Win with FreeBSD, it completely replaces it. It will do everything you need except look like MS-Win and people who are trying to get out of MS-land are happy to find that to be true.Give them a hand rather than a kick in the face. jerry as linux tries for many years to be windows replacement - it's both low end unix and low end windows replacement, windows for poor. not a nice future for FreeBSD IMHO. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Hi, but it is an MS replacement. If you overwrite your MS-Win with FreeBSD, it completely replaces it. It will do everything you need except look like MS-Win and people who are trying to get out of MS-land are happy to find that to be true.Give them a hand rather than a kick in the face. Amen to that! This is something I am also asking for. Wojciech you often help others here. Let's keep it this way. Please?! -- Zbigniew Szalbot ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 03:49:40PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: This is nonsense. The Windows interface itself is quite limited and not very powerful. as KDE and Gnome and others. when Win/95 came out being an OS/2 user at that time. From what I have read even the user interface of Mac OS X is much better that Windows although they have a much smaller market share. so why it have a much smaller market share? Because MS wrote restrictive contracts with companies trying to sell PCs saying that if they wanted to put MS on any of their machines, they had to put it on all of them. So, immediately every single PC that was sold ran some MS. Most people went with the flow. It was an easier business decision than trying to buck that current. This action should be considered totally illegal in the USA and probably many other countries. It is restraint of trade and forming a monopoly. Kodak lost a big case with similar ramifications many decades ago when they were refusing to sell film without including processing. But, the law cases against MS tended to be centered around including stuff like IE in the OS and making it difficult to switch to Netscape or other browsers. Forcing the OS on everyone seemed to fall off after the settlement (more like winding down) of those cases and now some PC sellers who still sell XP or Vista will sell you a machine with something else or even nothing. But, the damage is done. People/businesses have put a lot in to MS-Win, not only buying it and hiring large support forces to get it to work, but also in staff training and acquiring other products to function with it. There are plenty of people who are happy to just stick with MS and not think about it any more - just like businesses stuck with IBM and never listened to any other vendor back in their glory days. They will not be the ones who go to the trouble to read enough about FreeBSD to find this Email list and post questions about it. When someone goes looking for something OTHER than MS, then they are out of that MS fold and are searching for something better, not just for MS by another name. FreeBSD IS better. Some portion of those will look at it and decide to forget it. So what!? That is their problem. But, it is completely non-helpful to keep chanting the 'it ain't MS' mantra in the face of people who are looking to get away from MS. That is really 'DIS-ing' then to use a fad term that has fallen out of popularity. It is reasonable to caution people that FreeBSD and other UNIXen have a fairly steep learning curve. But, that is not an inpenetrable impediment. It is just part of the job of moving to something better. Anyone serious about finding a good alternative will take on that challenge willingly. It is not reasonable to continue to throw up unnecesary barriers to people moving to improve themselves. jerry Anyhow, of course you can fully replace Windows with a unix(-like) system and a suitable desktop enviroment (e.g. KDE, Gnome, XFCE). It depends on your specific requirements and if applications exist which do what you need. But saying that GUI's under Unix are per se inferior is just spreading FUD. Leave that to MS. ;-) after being one of sponsors of easy linux distributions and desktop environment (RedHat), microsoft now can say the truth that it's crap. Just a small example, how limited Windows really is: Even today it is you don't have to tell me this. as all unix desktop environments are. because this style of computing is limited by general. In technical university nearest me there was (or is) a guy that when teaching students unix he said: --- Don't use windows. Not because it crashes, not because it's buggy and not because it's damn slow. But because it learns bad habits, that are then almost impossible to get rid of. For me the best sentence about it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 02:16:37PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: All nice GUI for unices turned to be bad idea, every windows user will say it's poor compared to windows. and they are right. I totally disagree. Please note that your *opinion* doesn't become truth, i exactly repeat opinion of LOTS of windoze users that tried any unix GUI. it's poor mans windows. So, we are not respopnding to someone looking for Windos, but to someone looking for something else.GUI was not even mentioned in the OP.If the guy tries FreeBSD and finds its GUI resources not to his liking he can easily continue looking around. He asked for information about FreeBSD, not about finding a MS-Win look-alike. jerry ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:54:48AM -0500, Dan wrote: Wojciech Puchar([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.18 16:51:16 +0100: Have you used, erm... Linux? Both Linux and FreeBSD run pretty much at hardware level. You benchmark either, you'll get very close results in for benchmarks doing same thing over and over, or same thing in parallel linux can even be better. but try running many different tasks in parallel under linux. FreeBSD flies, while linux chokes. Can you point out some places on the web that confirm this? I can't point this out between Linux and FreeBSD, but back a few years ago, when I was involved in benchmarking high performance systems for purchase here, we found this to often be the case. Some systems just screamed on certain very parallel tasks, but practically came to a halt when a mix of tasks were run or even when trying to edit a script while things were running. Others were slightly less hot on the highly specialized tasks, but did well - much better - on the mix. We chose the system that handled the mix - which ran a BSD UNIX by the way, although a proprietary version as did most back then. Anyway, so, even though I haven't compared FreeBSD and Linux, I am not surprised to hear someone say there is this sort of difference. It is possible. Someone might investigate further and put out some verifiable numbers. jerry that's why i don't like benchmarks. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Jerry McAllister [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 10:54:48AM -0500, Dan wrote: Wojciech Puchar([EMAIL PROTECTED])@2008.11.18 16:51:16 +0100: Have you used, erm... Linux? Both Linux and FreeBSD run pretty much at hardware level. You benchmark either, you'll get very close results in for benchmarks doing same thing over and over, or same thing in parallel linux can even be better. but try running many different tasks in parallel under linux. FreeBSD flies, while linux chokes. Can you point out some places on the web that confirm this? I can't point this out between Linux and FreeBSD, but back a few years ago, when I was involved in benchmarking high performance systems for purchase here, we found this to often be the case. Some systems just screamed on certain very parallel tasks, but practically came to a halt when a mix of tasks were run or even when trying to edit a script while things were running. Others were slightly less hot on the highly specialized tasks, but did well - much better - on the mix. We chose the system that handled the mix - which ran a BSD UNIX by the way, although a proprietary version as did most back then. Anyway, so, even though I haven't compared FreeBSD and Linux, I am not surprised to hear someone say there is this sort of difference. It is possible. Someone might investigate further and put out some verifiable numbers. jerry I don't have verifiable numbers; but I can speak from personal experience. I do complex financial/clinical data analysis for hospitals. I was using MS Access as a front-end. On the server end, I started with Linux and PostgreSQL. I moved from Linux to FreeBSD because during my more complicated series of queries, the Linux system would slow to a crawl. Sometimes, the PostgreSQL server would die. This never happened with FreeBSD. I even added Samba services and a web forum for the department. From 2000 to 2006, the only unplanned downtime experienced with my PostgreSQL/FreeBSD combo was due to 2 separate, prolonged power outages. When power was restored, the hardware and database servers came back online. Sadly, I no longer work there; and no longer have control over database assets. I read once that: The difference between the lab and the real world is that, in the lab, there is no difference. I wish I had noted the source. Andrew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD and hardware??
Guys, stephen jackson wrote: I have read briefly on FreeBSD and it seems to be the winner on speed and stability versus Linux and of course MS Windows. [ ... ] Can we play cool with each other? If someone likes/has to use Gnu/Linux over FreeBSD or for that matter any other operating system, maybe its their choice; If someone finds FreeBSD runs well compared to Gnu/Linux, could they just point to the right benchmark on the web or post their personal benchmark here and be done with it? :) My point being that we could all be doing something really productive right now instead of discussing about all these. Don't you guys think so? Relax fellas. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
