subject:"Re\: Different OS's\? Marketshare"

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony
 Atkielski
 Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 11:59 AM
 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
 Subject: Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

 Robert Kim, Wireless Internet / Wifi Hotspot Advisor writes:

  any idea how many major OS's are out there today and what 
 market share
  they have?

 Fresh stats from my Web server:

 Windows . . . . . . . . . . 93.5118 %
 Macintosh . . . . . . . . .  4.7794 %
 Unknown . . . . . . . . . .  1.2731 %
 WebTV . . . . . . . . . . .  0.2028 %
 Linux . . . . . . . . . . .  0.1857 %
 Sun Solaris . . . . . . . .  0.0289 %
 FreeBSD . . . . . . . . . .  0.0182 %

So, Anthony,

  What website is this exactly?  Would you like the stats to show
different?  A few minutes with a script I can probably arrainge
them to say whatever you want. ;-)

  If your site is targeted to Windows users I would expect it
to have a high percentage of hits from Windows.

Ted
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Different OS's? Marketshare

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Robert Kim,
 Wireless Internet / Wifi Hotspot Advisor
 Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 7:49 AM
 To: List Free Bsd
 Subject: Different OS's? Marketshare

 Different OS's? Marketshare...

 any idea how many major OS's are out there today and what market share
 they have?

 i think

 WIN 70%
 Lin 20%
 Apple 5%
 so who is the other 5 % ???

 you realze the statisticians and economists hold that 2 percent is the
 break point...

Break even for what?  Oh I get it - break even to make a profit, right?

Hmm I wonder who gets the profits from the sale of FreeBSD?  Do you
suppose
they would be overly concerned with the 2% rule?

This is one of the (many) problems with trying to hold a free OS up to
a measuring stick designed for measuring commercial OSes.

Note that Linux is doing much better against these measuring sticks
because
the Linux community, for all their loud proclamations about being GPL,
has been steadily making Linux less and less distinguishable from the
commercial OSs.  When for example was the last time you saw a Linux
enthusiast with a burned CDROM of an ISO he downloaded somewhere?  The
ones I see all have colorful cardboard boxes with penguins on them
that they bought at Fry's.

Consider that even if FreeBSD had 50% of all running computers - if those
50% of computers all belong to people that never buy software and only
run freeware, the people that create these measuring sticks would bend
over backwards to be sure those 50% were not counted.  Not because they
have anything against FreeBSD, but simply because the customers of the
data these measuring sticks produce cannot sell anything to that 50% -
thus they don't care if that 50% exists or not.

Ted

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Glenn McCalley

I think he said break point not break even
In a previous life, our stats guys in banking considered anything that had
2% share (although I think we used 3%, whatever) of a population was
significant and worth breaking out for study.
Glenn.

- Original Message - 
From: Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Robert Kim, Wireless Internet / Wifi Hotspot Advisor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; List Free Bsd
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 7:30 AM
Subject: RE: Different OS's? Marketshare

  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Robert Kim,
  Wireless Internet / Wifi Hotspot Advisor
  Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 7:49 AM
  To: List Free Bsd
  Subject: Different OS's? Marketshare

  Different OS's? Marketshare...

  any idea how many major OS's are out there today and what market share
  they have?

  i think

  WIN 70%
  Lin 20%
  Apple 5%
  so who is the other 5 % ???

  you realze the statisticians and economists hold that 2 percent is the
  break point...

 Break even for what?  Oh I get it - break even to make a profit, right?

 Hmm I wonder who gets the profits from the sale of FreeBSD?  Do you
 suppose
 they would be overly concerned with the 2% rule?

 This is one of the (many) problems with trying to hold a free OS up to
 a measuring stick designed for measuring commercial OSes.

 Note that Linux is doing much better against these measuring sticks
 because
 the Linux community, for all their loud proclamations about being GPL,
 has been steadily making Linux less and less distinguishable from the
 commercial OSs.  When for example was the last time you saw a Linux
 enthusiast with a burned CDROM of an ISO he downloaded somewhere?  The
 ones I see all have colorful cardboard boxes with penguins on them
 that they bought at Fry's.

 Consider that even if FreeBSD had 50% of all running computers - if those
 50% of computers all belong to people that never buy software and only
 run freeware, the people that create these measuring sticks would bend
 over backwards to be sure those 50% were not counted.  Not because they
 have anything against FreeBSD, but simply because the customers of the
 data these measuring sticks produce cannot sell anything to that 50% -
 thus they don't care if that 50% exists or not.

 Ted

 ___
 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: Different OS's? Marketshare

Ted Mittelstaedt writes:

 What website is this exactly?

My own.

 Would you like the stats to show different?

I don't care what they show, as long as they are accurate.

 If your site is targeted to Windows users I would expect it
 to have a high percentage of hits from Windows.

It's not targeted to any particular operating system; it appeals to a
random cross-section of the Web population in terms of computers,
operating systems, browsers, and so on.  The stats mirror what I've seen
for other sites of general interest.

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

Ted Mittelstaedt writes:

 Note that Linux is doing much better against these measuring sticks
 because the Linux community, for all their loud proclamations about
 being GPL, has been steadily making Linux less and less
 distinguishable from the commercial OSs. When for example was the last
 time you saw a Linux enthusiast with a burned CDROM of an ISO he
 downloaded somewhere? The ones I see all have colorful cardboard boxes
 with penguins on them that they bought at Fry's.

I've been looking at Linux these past few days (trying to decide whether
to install FreeBSD or Linux on the machine I just freed up), and I've
noticed the same thing.  Free appears to be a near-total illusion when
it comes to Linux.  And hardly any distribution seems to require less
than 6 or 7 CDs.  And the Web sites I visit are extremely circumspect
about exactly how to download free versions of their distributions,
when they even offer such free copies.

It all looks very much (too much) like Microsoft.

There have been a few exceptions.  The Slackware site looked pretty
spartan compared to most of the others.

I still might try to get FreeBSD running on the desktop instead, since I
know FreeBSD better (but then again, perhaps I should be learning more
about Linux as well?).  That depends on getting past the boot problem
and resolving another anomaly with the SCSI disks, though.

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 04:30:35 -0800
Ted Mittelstaedt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 
  -Original Message-
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Robert Kim,
  Wireless Internet / Wifi Hotspot Advisor
  Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 7:49 AM
  To: List Free Bsd
  Subject: Different OS's? Marketshare
 
 
  Different OS's? Marketshare...
 
  any idea how many major OS's are out there today and what market
  share they have?
 
  i think
 
  WIN 70%
  Lin 20%
  Apple 5%
  so who is the other 5 % ???
 
  you realze the statisticians and economists hold that 2 percent is
  the break point...
 
snip 
 Note that Linux is doing much better against these measuring sticks
 because
 the Linux community, for all their loud proclamations about being GPL,
 has been steadily making Linux less and less distinguishable from the
 commercial OSs.  When for example was the last time you saw a Linux
 enthusiast with a burned CDROM of an ISO he downloaded somewhere?  The
 ones I see all have colorful cardboard boxes with penguins on them
 that they bought at Fry's.

You must be looking at a different Linux community than the one I'm
familiar with. I thought boxed sets of Linux had gone out of retail
stores years ago. Well, except maybe for a couple of Redhat choices. I
haven't even had reason to look for them. I'm having too much fun with
downloading versions and upgrading over the internet - yes, for free.

Linspire and Redhat tend to be Windows-like, in hiding their free
releases or not releasing them until the next version comes out, etc.,
but they're generally considered the exception in the Linux community.

Some of our webservers at work are FreeBSD, others are Debian Linux.
Don't shoot me, but I'm still using Debian on my desktop, too. If I had
to start paying for Linux releases and security patches, I would be
using FreeBSD faster than Windoze users can type format c:. 

I understand there's some competition between FreeBSD and Linux, but
Linux doesn't have to be considered evil just because they're not
FreeBSD fans.

Jacob
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:21:06 +0100
Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Ted Mittelstaedt writes:
 
  Note that Linux is doing much better against these measuring sticks
  because the Linux community, for all their loud proclamations about
  being GPL, has been steadily making Linux less and less
  distinguishable from the commercial OSs. When for example was the
  last time you saw a Linux enthusiast with a burned CDROM of an ISO
  he downloaded somewhere? The ones I see all have colorful cardboard
  boxes with penguins on them that they bought at Fry's.
 
 I've been looking at Linux these past few days (trying to decide
 whether to install FreeBSD or Linux on the machine I just freed up),
 and I've noticed the same thing.  Free appears to be a near-total
 illusion when it comes to Linux.  And hardly any distribution seems to
 require less than 6 or 7 CDs.  And the Web sites I visit are extremely
 circumspect about exactly how to download free versions of their
 distributions, when they even offer such free copies.
 
 It all looks very much (too much) like Microsoft.

You obviously didn't look at Debian then. The soon-to-be-released Sarge
version is currently 14cds, but you only need to download a 35MB or
110MB installation cd to get started. The rest of the programs are
downloaded from mirrors as needed. In fact, the Debian download page
_discourages_ people from downloading all 14 cds. The principles behind
Debian's apt-get is similar to FreeBSD's ports and portupgrade - but the
organization scheme is different. 

As to which will suit your purposes better; why not do a dual boot
between Linux and FreeBSD? They can co-exist happily.

HTH  HAND,
Jacob
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

Jacob S writes:

 You must be looking at a different Linux community than the one I'm
 familiar with. I thought boxed sets of Linux had gone out of retail
 stores years ago.

I bought a copy of Mandrake Linux in a retail store yesterday.  I saw
SuSE in the store, too.  Computer stores have a wider choice.

 I'm having too much fun with downloading versions and upgrading over
 the internet - yes, for free.

That says a lot about the type of user you are.

 Linspire and Redhat tend to be Windows-like, in hiding their free
 releases or not releasing them until the next version comes out, etc.,
 but they're generally considered the exception in the Linux community.

I've looked at a fair number of Linux Web sites over the past few days.
Almost all of them seemed to be trying to sell something.  It was often
extremely hard to find links pointing to downloadable free versions of
anything.

 I understand there's some competition between FreeBSD and Linux, but
 Linux doesn't have to be considered evil just because they're not
 FreeBSD fans.

It's not evil to sell software.  But it's not free software, either.

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Laurence Sanford

Anthony Atkielski wrote:
There have been a few exceptions.  The Slackware site looked pretty
spartan compared to most of the others.
 

I was converted to FreeBSD from Slackware. If you want to go Linux and 
maintain the freedom of configuration you have with FreeBSD (ie, just 
edit the text file, which is in a sensable spot) and get ...whatever it 
is you hope to get from linux - don't get me wrong, Linux has a lot to 
offer, I just can't personally think of anything it offers above and 
beyond FreeBSD - Slackware would be the way to go in my opinion. But 
that's holy war territory now, so I'll leave you with this: I switched 
to FreeBSD from Slackware because of the ports/package system. They make 
software installation so easy a Microsoft user could do it if they pay 
attention.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

Laurence Sanford writes:

 I was converted to FreeBSD from Slackware. If you want to go Linux and
 maintain the freedom of configuration you have with FreeBSD (ie, just
 edit the text file, which is in a sensable spot) and get ...whatever it
 is you hope to get from linux - don't get me wrong, Linux has a lot to
 offer, I just can't personally think of anything it offers above and 
 beyond FreeBSD - Slackware would be the way to go in my opinion.

I'm mainly debating whether or not some direct experience with Linux
would or would not be professionally useful to me.  Were it not for
that, FreeBSD would be the obvious choice.

As it is, FreeBSD will probably be the desktop I end up running, in part
because I know it better than Linux, in part because I can actually get
it to install and boot (unlike Mandrake, which just left me dead in the
water 30 seconds after booting and showing a pretty startup screen), and
in part because I like to know what I'm installing instead of just
installing a black box.

However, an obstacle is setting up an X environment, which I don't know
much about, and which I don't have unlimited time to fool around with.
Some of the Linux distributions claim to be plug and play (although I
have serious doubts about this).  Also, on my old hardware, I suspect
that hardly anything could be plug and play--there are just too many
weirdnesses on this HP Vectra.

 But
 that's holy war territory now, so I'll leave you with this: I switched
 to FreeBSD from Slackware because of the ports/package system. They make
 software installation so easy a Microsoft user could do it if they pay
 attention.

Does that include X and KDE?  I'm getting wild SCSI errors on FreeBSD
trying to install stuff, and I don't really know what that means, but it
doesn't appear to be corrupting anything, and it seems to be installing
software.

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 17:49:55 +0100
Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Jacob S writes:
 
  You must be looking at a different Linux community than the one I'm
  familiar with. I thought boxed sets of Linux had gone out of retail
  stores years ago.
 
 I bought a copy of Mandrake Linux in a retail store yesterday.  I saw
 SuSE in the store, too.  Computer stores have a wider choice.

Good. I'm glad to see the average Windows user looking around the
computer store still gets to see an alternative once in a while.

  I'm having too much fun with downloading versions and upgrading over
  the internet - yes, for free.
 
 That says a lot about the type of user you are.

True, but I still see a lot of new users on Linux e-mail lists that are
downloading it for free.

  Linspire and Redhat tend to be Windows-like, in hiding their free
  releases or not releasing them until the next version comes out,
  etc., but they're generally considered the exception in the Linux
  community.
 
 I've looked at a fair number of Linux Web sites over the past few
 days. Almost all of them seemed to be trying to sell something.  It
 was often extremely hard to find links pointing to downloadable free
 versions of anything.

So, where on www.debian.org do you see them trying to sell something?

  I understand there's some competition between FreeBSD and Linux, but
  Linux doesn't have to be considered evil just because they're not
  FreeBSD fans.
 
 It's not evil to sell software.  But it's not free software, either.

But Linux was compared to Microsoft, which would indicate that some
consider it to be giving in to evil influences.

Or we could get into the whole free-as-in-speech or free-as-in-food
debate. There is a reason that you can buy legal copies of Linspire on
E-bay for $3/each. But I definitely think it's better when it's
free-as-in-food, too. 

Jacob
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

Jacob S writes:

 You obviously didn't look at Debian then.

Yes, I did.

 As to which will suit your purposes better; why not do a dual boot
 between Linux and FreeBSD? They can co-exist happily.

I can't even successfully install a single OS on this machine, much less
two.

I tried to install Mandrake an hour ago, and not only did it freeze, but
it did something that prevents my CD-ROM from being visible to the
FreeBSD install.

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

Jacob S writes:

 Good. I'm glad to see the average Windows user looking around the
 computer store still gets to see an alternative once in a while.

I'm pretty sure I've seen Mandrake, SuSE, RedHat, Fedora, and a couple
of other Linux versions in computer stores.

A few years ago, I bought my first copy of FreeBSD (4.3) in a computer
store.  Now I can't find FreeBSD anywhere; I had to burn my own CD from
a download to install 5.3.

 So, where on www.debian.org do you see them trying to sell something?

On the first page, with the ad for XS4ALL.  If you click on Getting
Debian, the first option given is purchase of the CDs.

 But Linux was compared to Microsoft, which would indicate that some
 consider it to be giving in to evil influences.

I don't think the trend towards commercialism is healthy, noble, or
altruistic, although it's understandable.  But it's a bit hypocritical
of Linux fans to claim disdain for the Microsoft-style business model
when they are following precisely in Microsoft's footsteps themselves.
Of course, this was inevitable, but the Linux crowd never understood
that.

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Mike Hauber

On Wednesday 23 February 2005 01:28 pm, you wrote:


 I can't even successfully install a single OS on this machine,
 much less two.


What kind of problems are you having with FreeBSD?  There was a 
non-specific mention of errors regarding your hard drive, but 
said everything was working ok.


 I tried to install Mandrake an hour ago, and not only did it
 freeze, but it did something that prevents my CD-ROM from being
 visible to the FreeBSD install.

Whoa...  I installed Mandrake 9 when it released and it did the 
same thing.  I thought my cd burner had fried.  When I got 
another one, it worked fine for both.  

I kept the fried one for a while and stuck it in another box I 
was putting together (just to make sure it was fried before 
throwing it away) and there was nothing wrong with it.

Glad to see it wasn't just in my head.  lol

(I like the drake, though...  It's what I usually recommend for 
people who are wanting to try something other than windows and 
don't have the knowledge (desire to learn) necessary to build up 
a system of their own).

Mike
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:46:47 +0100
Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Jacob S writes:
 
  Good. I'm glad to see the average Windows user looking around the
  computer store still gets to see an alternative once in a while.
 
 I'm pretty sure I've seen Mandrake, SuSE, RedHat, Fedora, and a couple
 of other Linux versions in computer stores.
 
 A few years ago, I bought my first copy of FreeBSD (4.3) in a computer
 store.  Now I can't find FreeBSD anywhere; I had to burn my own CD
 from a download to install 5.3.

So, FreeBSD is vulnerable to this same hypocrasy; where it is sold in
stores but still hailed as a free OS?

  So, where on www.debian.org do you see them trying to sell
  something?
 
 On the first page, with the ad for XS4ALL.  If you click on Getting
 Debian, the first option given is purchase of the CDs.

Except that's simply listing the ways you can get Debian. If you look at
the list you will notice there is not a single Debian owned organization
on there selling cds. They provide links to people that do for your
convenience. They do this as a service - without getting any kind of
reimbursement from the vendors for listing them on the Debian
website. For more details see these pages on the Debian site:

http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/info
http://www.debian.org/CD/vendors/adding

If that makes Debian non-free, then FreeBSD is non-free too (or used to
be) - when you purchased version 4.3 from a computer store. 

  But Linux was compared to Microsoft, which would indicate that some
  consider it to be giving in to evil influences.
 
 I don't think the trend towards commercialism is healthy, noble, or
 altruistic, although it's understandable.  But it's a bit hypocritical
 of Linux fans to claim disdain for the Microsoft-style business model
 when they are following precisely in Microsoft's footsteps themselves.
 Of course, this was inevitable, but the Linux crowd never understood
 that.

Except you haven't proven that Debian has a trend towards
commercialism. My point in all of this is that your generalizations of
Linux would be about like Linux users saying all of the BSDs are the
same. 

And, by the way, if you look at www.debian.org and www.freebsd.org, you
will notice that they are both owned by non-profit organizations. That's
totally different from a Microsoft-style business model.

HAND,
Jacob
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Chad Leigh -- Shire . Net LLC

On Feb 23, 2005, at 12:23 PM, Jacob S wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:46:47 +0100
Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jacob S writes:
Good. I'm glad to see the average Windows user looking around the
computer store still gets to see an alternative once in a while.
I'm pretty sure I've seen Mandrake, SuSE, RedHat, Fedora, and a couple
of other Linux versions in computer stores.
A few years ago, I bought my first copy of FreeBSD (4.3) in a computer
store.  Now I can't find FreeBSD anywhere; I had to burn my own CD
from a download to install 5.3.
So, FreeBSD is vulnerable to this same hypocrasy; where it is sold in
stores but still hailed as a free OS?
I think you are misunderstanding what free means.  Though I think RMS 
is a closet-communist and dislike the GPL, his description of Free is 
pretty good.

Don't think free as in Free Beer...
Chad
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

Mike Hauber writes:

 What kind of problems are you having with FreeBSD?  There was a
 non-specific mention of errors regarding your hard drive, but 
 said everything was working ok.

I mentioned the main error in a separate thread: After successfully
installing the OS, I simply cannot persuade the machine to boot from the
hard disk.  It just blanks the screen and stops.  It must be booting
_something_, because it normally puts up an error message if it cannot
find the boot information it expects.  So I presume it's passing control
to garbage read from the disk and this is halting the system silently.

If I boot from floppy, no problem.  And if I boot from the install
floppy and then enter the loader, unload the kernel, switch the current
device to my boot disk (the hard disk), and boot from the loader, it
comes up instantly.  So there is some part of the boot process that's
not working.

I installed FreeBSD with a standard MBR on both disks, and I set the
first disk to bootable, but this doesn't seem to help, although I'm
still trying.

The other problem I have is SCSI errors that generate massive streams of
console error messages, although they don't appear to be errors that
cause data loss.  I got these while moving ports onto my machine.  Now
that I think about it, I think it might be a conflict with an old ISDN
card that is still mounted in the machine ... hmm.  Anyway, that's
secondary.

 Whoa...  I installed Mandrake 9 when it released and it did the
 same thing.  I thought my cd burner had fried.  When I got 
 another one, it worked fine for both.

I fixed this, somehow.  I turned on my SCSI devices (a CD burner, a
scanner, and a tape drive), and then FreeBSD saw the IDE CD-ROM drive.
Go figure.  Actually, it seemed to see the CD-ROM at boot, but it
wouldn't see it when it asked for install media.  It sees it after boot
even with the SCSI devices turned off.  Very mysterious.

I'm sure there are no hardware problems on this machine; it has been
running flawlessly for eight years.  So anything that doesn't work is
software.

 (I like the drake, though...  It's what I usually recommend for
 people who are wanting to try something other than windows and 
 don't have the knowledge (desire to learn) necessary to build up 
 a system of their own).

I'm still quite ambivalent about it.  I keep wondering if Linux is
different enough and useful enough to be worth dedicating this machine
to it ... or if I should just continue with FreeBSD and install X on the
machine (and KDE, probably, since it seems to be popular, although I
welcome suggestions).

Which window manager is the closest to classic UNIX window managers (as
opposed to wannabe Windows products)?

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

Jacob S writes:

 So, FreeBSD is vulnerable to this same hypocrasy; where it is sold in
 stores but still hailed as a free OS?

The FreeBSD was at an unbeatable price--I think it was only $10 or so,
just a bit more than the packaging cost.  That's not the case for Linux,
which I see going for prices well in excess of $100 ... perilously close
to the price of an OEM copy of Windows.

But the thing that disturbs me is that all of Windows was actually
written by Microsoft or licensed from someone else who wrote it, whereas
all of Linux (more or less) was written for free.  So how can Linux
distributors get away with charging $200 for software if Microsoft is
charging only slightly more?  The Linux crowd certainly didn't pay
anyone to develop any of the software they're selling.

 Except that's simply listing the ways you can get Debian.

But they list the money way first, like every other site.

 If that makes Debian non-free, then FreeBSD is non-free too (or used to
 be) - when you purchased version 4.3 from a computer store.

True.  But it was much more reasonably priced than Linux, and it was a
very good buy in consequence.

 Except you haven't proven that Debian has a trend towards
 commercialism.

Fine.  Wait and see.

 My point in all of this is that your generalizations of Linux would
 be about like Linux users saying all of the BSDs are the same.

Well, come to think of it ... it can be hard to tell the BSDs apart.

 And, by the way, if you look at www.debian.org and www.freebsd.org, you
 will notice that they are both owned by non-profit organizations. That's
 totally different from a Microsoft-style business model.

Some of the wealthiest organizations in the world are non-profit.  All
that means is that they make sure they have no money left over after
expenses (sometimes by paying high salaries to their employees).
There's nothing magic or high-minded about non-profit organizations.

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 12:32:50 -0700
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 On Feb 23, 2005, at 12:23 PM, Jacob S wrote:
 
  On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:46:47 +0100
  Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Jacob S writes:
 
  Good. I'm glad to see the average Windows user looking around the
  computer store still gets to see an alternative once in a while.
 
  I'm pretty sure I've seen Mandrake, SuSE, RedHat, Fedora, and a
 couple of other Linux versions in computer stores.
 
  A few years ago, I bought my first copy of FreeBSD (4.3) in a
 computer store.  Now I can't find FreeBSD anywhere; I had to burn my
 own CD from a download to install 5.3.
 
  So, FreeBSD is vulnerable to this same hypocrasy; where it is sold
  in stores but still hailed as a free OS?
 
 I think you are misunderstanding what free means.  Though I think
 RMS is a closet-communist and dislike the GPL, his description of
 Free is pretty good.
 
 Don't think free as in Free Beer...

I agree. And if you read my previous e-mails you will see I briefly
mention the free-as-in-food and free-as-in-speech argument. On the other
hand, Anthony appears to be arguing that it's hypocritical for Linux
users to call Linux free when they really mean free-as-in-speech.

Jacob
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Chad Leigh -- Shire . Net LLC

On Feb 23, 2005, at 12:32 PM, Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC wrote:
On Feb 23, 2005, at 12:23 PM, Jacob S wrote:
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 19:46:47 +0100
Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jacob S writes:
Good. I'm glad to see the average Windows user looking around the
computer store still gets to see an alternative once in a while.
I'm pretty sure I've seen Mandrake, SuSE, RedHat, Fedora, and a 
couple
of other Linux versions in computer stores.

A few years ago, I bought my first copy of FreeBSD (4.3) in a 
computer
store.  Now I can't find FreeBSD anywhere; I had to burn my own CD
from a download to install 5.3.
So, FreeBSD is vulnerable to this same hypocrasy; where it is sold in
stores but still hailed as a free OS?
I think you are misunderstanding what free means.  Though I think 
RMS is a closet-communist and dislike the GPL, his description of 
Free is pretty good.

Don't think free as in Free Beer...

As a follow up
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html
I am not saying I agree or disagree with everything written, but it 
gives a good idea of what Free means as in Free Software.

Chad
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Andrew L. Gould

On Wednesday 23 February 2005 12:46 pm, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
 Jacob S writes:
  Good. I'm glad to see the average Windows user looking around the
  computer store still gets to see an alternative once in a while.

 I'm pretty sure I've seen Mandrake, SuSE, RedHat, Fedora, and a
 couple of other Linux versions in computer stores.

 A few years ago, I bought my first copy of FreeBSD (4.3) in a
 computer store.  Now I can't find FreeBSD anywhere; I had to burn my
 own CD from a download to install 5.3.

You can still find FreeBSD at Fry's Electronics and MicroCenter.  I 
don't know if CompUSA still carries it.  I have mixed feelings about 
FreeBSD 5.0-5.2.1 being sold in the retail market.


  So, where on www.debian.org do you see them trying to sell
  something?

 On the first page, with the ad for XS4ALL.  If you click on Getting
 Debian, the first option given is purchase of the CDs.

  But Linux was compared to Microsoft, which would indicate that some
  consider it to be giving in to evil influences.

 I don't think the trend towards commercialism is healthy, noble, or
 altruistic, although it's understandable.  But it's a bit
 hypocritical of Linux fans to claim disdain for the Microsoft-style
 business model when they are following precisely in Microsoft's
 footsteps themselves. Of course, this was inevitable, but the Linux
 crowd never understood that.

This oversimplification is so flawed that I'm not sure how to best 
respond...

...but I'll try:;-)

First, Microsoft is a monopoly that has been found, in court, to have 
used unethical business practices.  Second, the motivation behind the 
creation of Windows focused more on a marketing plan than good design 
principles (you know: security and stuff).  I see no similarity between 
Microsoft and Open Source OS vendors on either of these points.

Third, the beauty of capitalism is that good can come from profit 
motive. (See:  Adam Smith's invisible hand.)  Let's face it, without 
commercialism, Linux development would not have benefited from the 
likes of IBM or HP.  Likewise, without commercialism, there would be 
very few, if any, *BSD or Linux developers performing open source 
development for a living.  The money has to come from somewhere.

Fourth, I appreciate all the hard work that goes into developing and 
packaging an operating system and its related applications.  I am happy 
to pay for the convenience of an operating system on a DVD.  It's only 
fair that the vendor be able to recover cost.  If earning a little 
profit motivates them to continue providing a great service, all the 
better.

Andrew Gould
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Laurence Sanford

Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Does that include X and KDE?  I'm getting wild SCSI errors on FreeBSD
trying to install stuff, and I don't really know what that means, but it
doesn't appear to be corrupting anything, and it seems to be installing
software.
 

Well, I don't use KDE because I don't particularly like heavyweight 
software unless I need it, although it has been several years since I 
looked at either that or Gnome, and I have seriously considered several 
times recently installing both of them to see what they've been up to. 
As for X, it should be quite painless with the possible exception of 
getting the config (XF86Config) right - the first time I did it, it 
caused me much swearing and gnashing of teeth, but here recently it's 
gotten so painless  that I don't really remember it very well. That 
could be because it's gotten much easier, or because I've gotten used to 
it, the truth probly landing somewhere in the middle.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

Andrew L. Gould writes:

 You can still find FreeBSD at Fry's Electronics and MicroCenter.  I
 don't know if CompUSA still carries it.  I have mixed feelings about 
 FreeBSD 5.0-5.2.1 being sold in the retail market.

How so?  Seems like it would be a good idea to me.

I see that one can still order 5.3 over the Internet.  Since I burned my
own CDs I don't necessarily need it (although a more permanent CD would
be nice), but if I did buy it it would be mostly to support the project
(provided that the project got the money).

 I see no similarity between Microsoft and Open Source OS vendors on
 either of these points.

Perhaps the similarities will become more obvious with time.

 Let's face it, without commercialism, Linux development would not have
 benefited from the likes of IBM or HP. Likewise, without
 commercialism, there would be very few, if any, *BSD or Linux
 developers performing open source development for a living. The money
 has to come from somewhere.

True.  It's virtually inevitable.

 Fourth, I appreciate all the hard work that goes into developing and
 packaging an operating system and its related applications.  I am happy
 to pay for the convenience of an operating system on a DVD.  It's only
 fair that the vendor be able to recover cost.  If earning a little 
 profit motivates them to continue providing a great service, all the 
 better.

Fine.  Except that distributors are barely doing anything more than
repackaging someone else's work.  They didn't write Linux.

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

Laurence Sanford writes:

 Well, I don't use KDE because I don't particularly like heavyweight
 software unless I need it ...

Heavyweight in the sense of resources required, or complexity, or what?

I got the impression that KDE was the one that everyone used.

Which window manager most closely approximates the GUI of traditional
UNIX workstations?

Is it possible to install multiple X servers on the same machine so that
one can fire up whichever one strikes one's fancy at a given time?

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 20:39:08 +0100
Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Jacob S writes:

So, FreeBSD is vulnerable to this same hypocrasy; where it is sold
in stores but still hailed as a free OS?

The FreeBSD was at an unbeatable price--I think it was only $10 or so,
just a bit more than the packaging cost. That's not the case for
Linux, which I see going for prices well in excess of $100 ...
perilously close to the price of an OEM copy of Windows.

You're confusing the boxed sets of Linux distributions with simply
buying cds. Debian does not do boxed sets.

There is not anything that prevents retailers from still selling the cd
sets for cheap prices. There are still some retailers that sell
just the minimal cd sets, it is just unfortunate that there are not
any big chains doing this (that I know of). Boxed sets, however,
usually come with a book and support- something that is worth
considerably more than a few reusable plastic coasters.

But the thing that disturbs me is that all of Windows was actually
written by Microsoft or licensed from someone else who wrote it,
whereas all of Linux (more or less) was written for free. So how can
Linux distributors get away with charging $200 for software if
Microsoft is charging only slightly more? The Linux crowd certainly
didn't pay anyone to develop any of the software they're selling.

Please see Chad's e-mail about the difference between free-as-in-speech
and free-as-in-food. It doesn't matter how much they charge if it is
still licensed as free-as-in-speech - because you or I could buy a
copy, burn our own copies of it and sell it $10 cheaper than them and
still be legal.

Except that's simply listing the ways you can get Debian.

But they list the money way first, like every other site.

Yep, and FreeBSD lists the money way before the download way, too. See
http://www.freebsd.org/where.html. Your point?

Debian does not get paid for listing cd vendors, which I'm sure is the
same way with FreeBSD.

If that makes Debian non-free, then FreeBSD is non-free too (or used
to be) - when you purchased version 4.3 from a computer store.

True. But it was much more reasonably priced than Linux, and it was a
very good buy in consequence.

You're generalizing again - using other Linux distributions'
boxed-set prices to prove that Debian is hypocritical.

Please see
http://www.easylinuxcds.com/catalog/index.php?cPath=49osCsid=62927e80e86dcc3defbb63e36a224a3d
where they sell Debian (and other distributions of Linux) and FreeBSD
for the same price per cd. Or you could look at www.freebsdmall.com and
www.bsdmall.com where the bsd prices are closer to $10 per cd, instead
of the $2 - 3 per cd price for Linux from www.linuxmall.com.

Except you haven't proven that Debian has a trend towards
commercialism.

Fine. Wait and see.

I'd rather not wait. Why let good software go down the drain? :-)

snip
And, by the way, if you look at www.debian.org and www.freebsd.org,
you will notice that they are both owned by non-profit
organizations. That's totally different from a Microsoft-style
business model.

Some of the wealthiest organizations in the world are non-profit.
All that means is that they make sure they have no money left over
after expenses (sometimes by paying high salaries to their employees).
There's nothing magic or high-minded about non-profit organizations.

But just because some non-profit organizations are wealthy does not
prove that Debian is 1) wealthy or 2) hypocritical.

Jacob
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Laurence Sanford

Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Laurence Sanford writes:
 

Well, I don't use KDE because I don't particularly like heavyweight
software unless I need it ...
   

Heavyweight in the sense of resources required, or complexity, or what?
I got the impression that KDE was the one that everyone used.
Which window manager most closely approximates the GUI of traditional
UNIX workstations?
Is it possible to install multiple X servers on the same machine so that
one can fire up whichever one strikes one's fancy at a given time?
 

In the sense of resource usage is what I mean when I say heavy weight. 
While KDE is quite popular, there are probly (litterally) hundreds of 
window managers that will run under X, so saying Everyone uses N window 
manager is going to be patently false.

You'll only need one X server - what you're looking at having multiple 
versions of is the window manager. That's what runs over top of X to 
provide the style.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:24:36 +0100
Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Andrew L. Gould writes:
snip
  Fourth, I appreciate all the hard work that goes into developing and
  packaging an operating system and its related applications.  I am
  happy to pay for the convenience of an operating system on a DVD. 
  It's only fair that the vendor be able to recover cost.  If earning
  a little profit motivates them to continue providing a great
  service, all the better.
 
 Fine.  Except that distributors are barely doing anything more than
 repackaging someone else's work.  They didn't write Linux.

And how would you classify all of the Gnu and gpl software, or the
Linux software that runs under the Linux compatability layer in FreeBSD?
KDE, Nmap, Xfree86, x.org, mailman, exim, qmail and ezmlm are
just a few that come to mind.

Sorry, but I think you need to look under the hood better at Linux
before you say it's just being repackaged. Linux distributions may not
write their own kernels, but they do all help with development of the
Linux kernel. And there are at least 4 different methods of installing
packages that I can think of, from different distributions (Slackware's
tar.gz, Redhat's .rpm, Debian's .deb and Gentoo's ebuild).

Jacob
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Andrew L. Gould

On Wednesday 23 February 2005 02:24 pm, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
 Andrew L. Gould writes:
  You can still find FreeBSD at Fry's Electronics and MicroCenter.  I
  don't know if CompUSA still carries it.  I have mixed feelings
  about FreeBSD 5.0-5.2.1 being sold in the retail market.

 How so?  Seems like it would be a good idea to me.

5.0-5.2.1 weren't labelled STABLE.  I worry about the uninformed 
assuming they're buying a STABLE version.


 I see that one can still order 5.3 over the Internet.  Since I burned
 my own CDs I don't necessarily need it (although a more permanent CD
 would be nice), but if I did buy it it would be mostly to support the
 project (provided that the project got the money).

  I see no similarity between Microsoft and Open Source OS vendors on
  either of these points.

 Perhaps the similarities will become more obvious with time.

Perhaps you should apply for a position at Microsoft.  After all, FUD is 
a Microsoft tactic.


  Let's face it, without commercialism, Linux development would not
  have benefited from the likes of IBM or HP. Likewise, without
  commercialism, there would be very few, if any, *BSD or Linux
  developers performing open source development for a living. The
  money has to come from somewhere.

 True.  It's virtually inevitable.

No.  Open Source projects could continue developing at the slow rate 
allowed by developers' spare time.   _Fortunately_, that is not 
necessary.


  Fourth, I appreciate all the hard work that goes into developing
  and packaging an operating system and its related applications.  I
  am happy to pay for the convenience of an operating system on a
  DVD.  It's only fair that the vendor be able to recover cost.  If
  earning a little profit motivates them to continue providing a
  great service, all the better.

 Fine.  Except that distributors are barely doing anything more than
 repackaging someone else's work.  They didn't write Linux.

The distros (SUSE,  for example) do quite of bit of distro-specific 
development (YAST, for example) and shared development (reiserfs, for 
example).  They also fund Linux development by hiring Linux kernel and 
application developers.  As for the vendors that just sell CD's, the 
prices vary with what the market will pay.  There are plenty of very 
inexpensive sources for the *BSD or Linux CD's; so there's no excuse 
for anyone to pay too much.

It's easy to be cynical; but you'll be much happier if you give reality 
a chance.

Andrew Gould
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Kevin Kinsey

Anthony Atkielski wrote:
I'm still quite ambivalent about it.  I keep wondering if Linux is
different enough and useful enough to be worth dedicating this machine
to it ... or if I should just continue with FreeBSD and install X on the
machine (and KDE, probably, since it seems to be popular, although I
welcome suggestions).
Which window manager is the closest to classic UNIX window managers (as
opposed to wannabe Windows products)?
 

Well, you can do a little research yourself (I'm sure you will at some
point, anyway):
(Hmm, a store?  Browse screenshots and descriptions):
http://xwinman.org/
(A comparison article, 5 wm's and the XFCE environment):
   http://rootprompt.org/article.php3?article=8346
IIRC, there's also a rather large thread on bsdforums.org where
people are showing off their desktops.  You could also get
a look-see there...
As for my own experience, I can't really answer your question,
because classic UNIX window managers is somewhat meaningless
to me as a newbie.
Part of Free Software is freedom of choice as you well know.
There are so many choices out there that your head can spin
while looking.  My experience:
1.  BlackBox.  Small, light, fast.  To me, rather mouse oriented.
Collapsing menus.  A small app bar at the top, but no default
icon support, etc.
2.  FluxBox.  BlackBox with more themes*.
3.  Enlightenment.  Larger then bb/fb.  I didn't stick with it
long at all, so I can't say much else.
4.  XFCE.  I liked it ... BSD licensed (IIRC), no larger than
Enlightenment, certainly.  One toolbar in default install,
a few default tools.  Icons on the toolbar (can't remember
if you can put 'em on the desktop in default install).
5.  GNOME.  On my desktop now ... why?  Curiosity, I guess.
Lots of tools, takes lots of muscle.  Probably a windows wannabe
as you say (but it crashes less ... ;-).  I wouldn't put a new KDE
or GNOME on a very old box, but maybe I don't know how to
go about that very well (I know there is a gnome-lite, and there
is probably a corresponding light KDE).  It seems a tad slow ATM, but
this box runs as gateway/firewall, SMTP/POP3, http (development
server), DNS, rsyncd, samba on the office network, plus currently
9 windows in Mozilla, 23 in Opera, mail client, Dictionary app,
this compose window, 5-6 terminals running SSH to 3 servers
across 4 desktops, the GIMP with a rather big photo open, and a
small word processor document.)
There are so many other WMs.  It all depends on how you work.
And, you can run some toolbars/docks, iconifying program, pretty
much any X application, whatever, on just about anything --
tools, not policy after all. 

Greg Lehey, for example, states (~to the effect of~) I'm not into
eye candy, and runs something rather simple (twm? fvwm?) that's
all configured exactly the way he wants it across several monitors,
at rather/very high resolution(s).  He either has great eyesight,
or has good glasses, I guess (and it's pure speculation and
nothing personal at all) because he works surrounded by words,
words, and more words, I suppose, whether it's code, mail, whatever. 

I'm different, I was a M$ user for quite a while, and apart from
the differences in  the toolbar at the bottom and the fact that
I have top and right-side toolbars also, I'm not sure my desktop
looks much different than it did back on Win98. (Well, on 10 items
on this desktop --- but the toolbars [32 launchers now] make up for it.)
Except, it never turns blue and give me ominous white letters, nor
does it ever lockup without leaving me some option besides a
power cycle.
Kevin Kinsey
*I'm sure there are other things, and my descriptions are
at best those of the uninitiated.  My apologies to the devoted,
I do not aim to offend.  That would extend to all users of
$YOUR_WM_HERE
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Mike Hauber

On Wednesday 23 February 2005 02:34 pm, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
 Mike Hauber writes:
  What kind of problems are you having with FreeBSD?  There was
  a non-specific mention of errors regarding your hard drive,
  but said everything was working ok.

 I mentioned the main error in a separate thread: After
 successfully installing the OS, I simply cannot persuade the
 machine to boot from the hard disk.  It just blanks the screen
 and stops.  It must be booting _something_, because it normally
 puts up an error message if it cannot find the boot information
 it expects.  So I presume it's passing control to garbage read
 from the disk and this is halting the system silently.

 If I boot from floppy, no problem.  And if I boot from the
 install floppy and then enter the loader, unload the kernel,
 switch the current device to my boot disk (the hard disk), and
 boot from the loader, it comes up instantly.  So there is some
 part of the boot process that's not working.

 I installed FreeBSD with a standard MBR on both disks, and I
 set the first disk to bootable, but this doesn't seem to
 help, although I'm still trying.

 The other problem I have is SCSI errors that generate massive
 streams of console error messages, although they don't appear
 to be errors that cause data loss.  I got these while moving
 ports onto my machine.  Now that I think about it, I think it
 might be a conflict with an old ISDN card that is still mounted
 in the machine ... hmm.  Anyway, that's secondary.

 I'm sure there are no hardware problems on this machine; it has
 been running flawlessly for eight years.  So anything that
 doesn't work is software.


Found the thread...  Have you tried installing an older version?  
(4.4, for example?)  I've had a lot of issues trying to install 
FreeBSD =4.9 on pre 586s, but mostly they were setup for a quick 
showtell (latest  greatest wasn't really necessary).

Not saying that you should settle for an older version, but it may 
help in discovering what the issues are.

  (I like the drake, though...  It's what I usually recommend
  for people who are wanting to try something other than
  windows and don't have the knowledge (desire to learn)
  necessary to build up a system of their own).

 I'm still quite ambivalent about it.  I keep wondering if Linux
 is different enough and useful enough to be worth dedicating
 this machine to it ... or if I should just continue with
 FreeBSD and install X on the machine (and KDE, probably, since
 it seems to be popular, although I welcome suggestions).


I came to FreeBSD first after deciding that I worked too hard to 
spend any more money on an OS I couldn't depend on (kinda like I 
won't spend money on certain types of video games because they 
ultimately do nothing but parse me off :) ).  Frustrated, I 
bounced back and forth between anything I could get my hands on 
(legally, of course).  I have an entire CD book filled with 
Linuses that I've tried, but ultimately settled with the BSDs.  

Some of the Linuses are great, but I've come to appreciate the 
BSDs more than anything else.  Because of this, I make my 
investments in things that I actually appreciate.

I only suggest Mandrake to people just coming out of windows as to 
to help minimize the frustrations that I went through (I guess 
I'm a symphathiser of sorts, but not so much that I'm willing to 
hold their hand :) ).  

If someone is comfortable enough that they'll actually use the man 
command, ask intelligent questions, and appreciate the 
documentation that's out there (ie, read), then I definately 
suggest a BSD.  (ie, if you can install FreeBSD and setup X, then 
why bother with Mandrake?)  Not that it's a bad OS, just that 
I've found that people who know how/where to learn will come to 
appreciate the BSDs over the other options.

 Which window manager is the closest to classic UNIX window
 managers (as opposed to wannabe Windows products)?

Well...  There's a lot of options available.  Personally, I prefer 
something like blackbox for administrative logins.  It's _very_ 
lightweight and (like all things should be), you pretty much 
build it from the ground up.  

Mike
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Kevin Kinsey

Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Laurence Sanford writes:
 

Well, I don't use KDE because I don't particularly like heavyweight
software unless I need it ...
   

Heavyweight in the sense of resources required, or complexity, or what?
I got the impression that KDE was the one that everyone used.
 

Hmm, now a different thread, perhaps?  Different WM's marketshare?
It's pretty much to each his own out here, I'd say.  (see my earlier).
Which window manager most closely approximates the GUI of traditional
UNIX workstations?
 

Well, once again, I dunno.  I will mention that AfterStep is
NextStep's successor, I think.
Is it possible to install multiple X servers on the same machine so that
one can fire up whichever one strikes one's fancy at a given time?
 

I don't see why not, although it'd probably be more common to simply
kill one wm session and start another to save resources.  Maybe it's
possible.  I don't know if, since you've just one DISPLAY (in theory, 
anyhow)
you would configure it.

Hmm, just tested.  No can do, because just one DISPLAY.  Maybe some
X guru has a solution.  GNOME on ttyv1, fluxbox on ttyv2, term on ttyv3
etc., etc Would be pretty cool.
Now, if you have two video cards
Kevin Kinsey
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread markzero

 Is it possible to install multiple X servers on the same machine so that
 one can fire up whichever one strikes one's fancy at a given time?
 
 I don't see why not, although it'd probably be more common to simply
 kill one wm session and start another to save resources.  Maybe it's
 possible.  I don't know if, since you've just one DISPLAY (in theory, 
 anyhow)
 you would configure it.
 
 Hmm, just tested.  No can do, because just one DISPLAY.  Maybe some
 X guru has a solution.  GNOME on ttyv1, fluxbox on ttyv2, term on ttyv3
 etc., etc Would be pretty cool.
 

This is certainly possible. You need to start X via something other than
startx as you must manually set DISPLAY vars. I have run two X servers on
my machine many times - one running a local desktop environment and the
other running a WM from a remote box over SSH (for no particular reason
other than that it's fun).

-- 
PGP: http://www.darklogik.org/pub/pgp/pgp.txt
B776 43DC 8A5D EAF9 2126 9A67 A7DA 390F DEFF 9DD1


pgp8ro58RVHFP.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Kevin Kinsey

markzero wrote:
Is it possible to install multiple X servers on the same machine so that
one can fire up whichever one strikes one's fancy at a given time?
 

I don't see why not, although it'd probably be more common to simply
kill one wm session and start another to save resources.  Maybe it's
possible.  I don't know if, since you've just one DISPLAY (in theory, 
anyhow)
you would configure it.

Hmm, just tested.  No can do, because just one DISPLAY.  Maybe some
X guru has a solution.  GNOME on ttyv1, fluxbox on ttyv2, term on ttyv3
etc., etc Would be pretty cool.
   

This is certainly possible. You need to start X via something other than
startx as you must manually set DISPLAY vars. I have run two X servers on
my machine many times - one running a local desktop environment and the
other running a WM from a remote box over SSH (for no particular reason
other than that it's fun).
 

I figured there was a way.  Most times there is.  I was thinking
two Xservers, one monitor.  CTL-ALT-F2 is Desktop B, CTL-ALT-F3
is desktop C, etc.  How 'bout that?
Of course, I really have no idea *why*, either; but it does at
least sound fun.
Kevin Kinsey
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread markzero

 This is certainly possible. You need to start X via something other than
 startx as you must manually set DISPLAY vars. I have run two X servers on
 my machine many times - one running a local desktop environment and the
 other running a WM from a remote box over SSH (for no particular reason
 other than that it's fun).
  
 
 I figured there was a way.  Most times there is.  I was thinking
 two Xservers, one monitor.  CTL-ALT-F2 is Desktop B, CTL-ALT-F3
 is desktop C, etc.  How 'bout that?
 
 Of course, I really have no idea *why*, either; but it does at
 least sound fun.
 
 Kevin Kinsey

Yes, that's it, except they were on F7 and F8... :)

Mark

-- 
PGP: http://www.darklogik.org/pub/pgp/pgp.txt
B776 43DC 8A5D EAF9 2126 9A67 A7DA 390F DEFF 9DD1


pgpNvl8fBuDBx.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

2005-02-23 Thread Chris Hill

On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
[...] I keep wondering if [...] I should just continue with FreeBSD 
and install X on the machine (and KDE, probably, since it seems to be 
popular, although I welcome suggestions).

Which window manager is the closest to classic UNIX window managers 
(as opposed to wannabe Windows products)?
It's not clear what you mean by classic UNIX window managers - maybe 
CDE or Motif? In any case I've never used them and can't answer that 
specific question.

As for the former... I installed KDE on my 4.10 machine a while ago just 
to have a look-see, and it seemed *very* Windows-y to me. Start menu, 
integrated file/web browser, etc. I don't care for it, and didn't bother 
reinstalling it after going to 5.3. If you don't want a wannabe Windows 
product, I think you might not like KDE. Plus, the KDE meta-port takes 
MANY hours to install from ports - at least on my now-modest hardware 
and mid-speed DSL line.

Before and after KDE, I've been using fvwm2 - it's a relatively plain 
but very configurable window manager, though I suppose you could make it 
as fancy as you wanted.

For a rundown of various WMs, see http://www.plig.org/xwinman/
HTH.
--
Chris Hill   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
** [ Busy Expunging | ]
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

Mike Hauber writes:

 Found the thread...  Have you tried installing an older version?

No, but most of the problems I saw in my research were on 4.x or older
versions.  This version (5.3) seems to run fine once it's up; the only
problem is getting the machine to boot it.  Also, I'm getting those
weird SCSI disk errors.

 Well...  There's a lot of options available.  Personally, I prefer
 something like blackbox for administrative logins.  It's _very_ 
 lightweight and (like all things should be), you pretty much 
 build it from the ground up.

What do you mean by building it from the ground up?

What do I get when I type startx by default?  It looks extremely simple,
whatever it is, just a few simple windows in green borders on a rather
irritating gray crosshatched background.

-- 
Anthony


___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Different OS's? Marketshare

 -Original Message-
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Jacob S
 Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2005 12:53 PM
 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
 Subject: Re: Different OS's? Marketshare

 On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 21:24:36 +0100
 Anthony Atkielski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Andrew L. Gould writes:
 snip
   Fourth, I appreciate all the hard work that goes into
 developing and
   packaging an operating system and its related applications.  I am
   happy to pay for the convenience of an operating system on a DVD.
   It's only fair that the vendor be able to recover cost.  If earning
   a little profit motivates them to continue providing a great
   service, all the better.

  Fine.  Except that distributors are barely doing anything more than
  repackaging someone else's work.  They didn't write Linux.

 And how would you classify all of the Gnu and gpl software, or the
 Linux software that runs under the Linux compatability layer
 in FreeBSD?
 KDE, Nmap, Xfree86, x.org, mailman, exim, qmail and ezmlm are
 just a few that come to mind.

Whoh there Jacob.  What are you talking about?

The only software that runs under the linux compatability layer is
compiled
linux binaries where the source isn't available.  All the programs you
mentioned above are source available, and they are all compiled to native
FreeBSD binaries under FreeBSD.

Ted

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: Different OS's? Marketshare