On Wednesday 15 August 2007 12:39:17 Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> One of the best emails I've seen as a reply to a user coming from the
> Windows world.
>
> Many thanks for taking the time to write all this :-)
>
> - Giorgos
>
> On 2007-08-15 03:14, David Southwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I se
On 8/10/07, Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Start with DesktopBSD 1.6 since it's closer to FreeBSD than PC-BSD if
> > you need to learn FreeBSD more.
>
> both of them should win a similar message at www.freebsd.org
>
> "We are not supporting both DesktopBSD and PC-BSD. that's not o
One of the best emails I've seen as a reply to a user coming from the
Windows world.
Many thanks for taking the time to write all this :-)
- Giorgos
On 2007-08-15 03:14, David Southwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I see where both sides in this argument are coming from.. basically a
> lack of u
On Wednesday 15 August 2007 03:14:09 David Southwell wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 August 2007 23:20:28 Goltsios Theodore wrote:
> > Well sorry if I'm getting annoying but I think you face the Unix
> > world in the wrong manner. Well you expect to find something you are
> > used to, or something l
On Wednesday 08 August 2007 23:20:28 Goltsios Theodore wrote:
> Well sorry if I'm getting annoying but I think you face the Unix
> world in the wrong manner. Well you expect to find something you are
> used to, or something like MS Win you only know. I advise that you
> should be more open mi
Well sorry if I'm getting annoying but I think you face the Unix
world in the wrong manner. Well you expect to find something you are
used to, or something like MS Win you only know. I advise that you
should be more open minded, willing to read and spare time to get
familiar to the Unix
On Sat, Aug 11, 2007 at 01:26:58AM +0200, Danny Pansters wrote:
>
> Hope I did. It's not all that hard to give a to-the-point and honest answer.
I hope you helped, too. Your comments preceding this were to the point,
well considered, and informative. At least, I think so. However . . .
>
>
Danny Pansters wrote:
(...)
Hope I did. It's not all that hard to give a to-the-point and honest answer.
Now here's some food for thought for all the "advocates" who found it
necessary to answer:
It's apparently harder to shut your fat fucking face if you don't have
anything useful to cont
On Thursday 09 August 2007 06:22:26 Latitude wrote:
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
> to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
Well, it's a very different thing. But it can do mostly the same tasks though
(and many more).
> use
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 11:50:10AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >>>It's already been mentioned, but I would strongly recommend PCBSD for
> >>>the windows convert. Having PCBSD allows me to easily setup friends
> >>
> >>i would rather recomend not moving away from windows.
> >
> >Why?
>
> becau
Rolf G Nielsen wrote:
Reid Linnemann wrote:
My ten year old niece has been brainwashed by the GUI quagmire. She
saw my FreeBSD 6-STABLE console on my amd64 3000+ and wanted to know
why i was using such an "old" computer. She had the visual aspect of
the user interface ingrained as a measure o
Hi Wojciech,
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
and about DOS apps - few small companies are still using our 18-year old
(so really mature ;) DOS apps. when asked if they like me to write new
unix version (+lots of adventages here, remote sessions etc.) then don't.
they just don't like to pay anymore becau
Hi Gerard,
Gerard wrote:
I was not aware of any place where they gave computers away.
In the UK we call them "skips". Not sure what the rest of the world
calls them. [Large metal junk containers placed at the back of large
buildings near the other bins. They're usually hired rather than owne
idea how, and I was expecting a nice "user-friendly" GUI, like Windoze, but
without the constant crashes.
that's what most people expect. and thats why i say:
Windows it the most windows compatible system available. don't change to
other.
In 1999 I purchased "The complete FreeBSD, 3rd edit
On August 10, 2007 at 03:47AM Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> well here in poland people do see a difference, because computer has to be
> bought, while windoze can be pirated.
I was not aware of any place where they gave computers away.
> in my 320 user network less than ten bought windoze, over 30
On Gdańsk technical university there was a man about 50 years teaching
people unix (mostly).
what he talked very often:
---
DO NOT use windows EVER. Not because it's slow, not because it crashes,
and not because it can't do much. Not because of security too.
But because it's teaching BAD HAB
It's already been mentioned, but I would strongly recommend PCBSD for
the windows convert. Having PCBSD allows me to easily setup friends
i would rather recomend not moving away from windows.
Why?
because only windows is truly windows like. there is nothing like "better
windows" while ther
I am not following this. If (X.org + some WM) is not a GUI,
how would you define
He probably equates a desktop environment (such as KDE/Gnome/etc.) to a GUI.
most people exactly equates that and i stated i that such defined GUI is
completely useless and actually takes over time and resources
Am Freitag 10 August 2007 10:57:38 schrieb [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > i don't use GUI. it takes a lot and gives nothing. i use both text
> > and graphic (X) based apps and no gui. i use fvwm2 with my config,
> > there are plenty of nice other wm's good for t
Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i don't use GUI. it takes a lot and gives nothing. i use both text
> and graphic (X) based apps and no gui. i use fvwm2 with my config,
> there are plenty of nice other wm's good for that.
I am not following this. If (X.org + some WM) is not a GUI,
ho
On Fri, Aug 10, 2007 at 09:37:19AM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >It's already been mentioned, but I would strongly recommend PCBSD for
> >the windows convert. Having PCBSD allows me to easily setup friends
>
> i would rather recomend not moving away from windows.
Why?
--
CCD CopyWrite Chad
To be honest I don't think FreeBSD is ready for this yet. It's getting there,
when it will be, i will switch to other unix flavour
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe
friendly windows clone, you might look into "PC-BSD". It comes out of
the box ready for Windows converts.
stop telling about them "friendly". most of thieves are friendly too, just
after some time you see money is missing
___
freebsd-questions@freebs
I don't really think of entirely unnecessary (for most purposes) server
software as "standard utilities". Speaking only for myself, I *have*
tried MacOS X (and used it in a professional capacity), and I too find it
to be "very little unix" with "lots of bulky overhead". I also find it
to be cl
to the task. In general, I would say that FreeBSD is not the appropriate
choice for a "user" who is not at least somewhat interested in the how's
and why's of the OS.
FreeBSD is excellent for average user if accessed through terminal (or X
terminal) and configured by system administrator.
or
User-friendliness is obviously subjective. Some people consider a
my definition is that user friendly system does what i want, does it right
and quickly. simply - it's my slave. not my master.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://
sincerely assume that.
well here in poland people do see a difference, because computer has to be
bought, while windoze can be pirated.
in my 320 user network less than ten bought windoze, over 300 uses pirated
one, 10 uses my X-terminals.
and it's good for microsoft. if police in poland
Sorry, I agree with you, s/GUI/graphic based/ in my post. I've just
Yes - graphics based. I use graphics based programs like gimp, links
-g, opera, xv & xzgv, gv and xdvi.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mai
I still do maintain a Windows 2000 machine for my graphics workstation, and
to run my vintage DOS apps.
qemu works well.
and about DOS apps - few small companies are still using our 18-year old
(so really mature ;) DOS apps. when asked if they like me to write new
unix version (+lots of adve
Start with DesktopBSD 1.6 since it's closer to FreeBSD than PC-BSD if
you need to learn FreeBSD more.
both of them should win a similar message at www.freebsd.org
"We are not supporting both DesktopBSD and PC-BSD. that's not out
products, just loosely based on FreeBSD. Please DO NOT judge Free
FreeBSD 6-STABLE console on my amd64 3000+ and wanted to know why i was using
such an "old" computer. She had the visual aspect of the user interface
ingrained as a measure of the capabilities of the machine. Granted, it could
be only because she's ten, but I think we'd find a lot of people thin
It's already been mentioned, but I would strongly recommend PCBSD for
the windows convert. Having PCBSD allows me to easily setup friends
i would rather recomend not moving away from windows.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lis
Norberto Meijome wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 07:07:53 +0200
> Peter Boosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Yes, I think you're right. Most FreeBSD users are used to do things the
>> 'command line way'.
>
> I think it is more a 'Unix users' rather than FBSD users thing. The fact
> remains that u
On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 07:07:53 +0200
Peter Boosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Pollywog wrote:
> >
> > I hope I do not get flamed for saying this...
>
> FreeBSDers don't flame :-)
>
> >
> > I am a new arrival to *BSD though I have used Linux
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 23:22:26 -0500
Latitude <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows,
Hello Robert,
I don't think I'll tell you what to do - i think most contributors to this
thread have done a pretty good job @ pointing you in the right direction (w
Hi Latitude.
Latitude wrote:
you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
users of how easy the switch may be.
What, us? The users? As Mary said, we don't care how you get your
everyday tasks done. Why should we present any arguments at all?
The switch isn't easy. It's damn
On Friday 10 August 2007 00:29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 08/08/07, Latitude <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
> > to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
> > users of how easy the switch may be.
S
On 08/08/07, Latitude <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
> to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
> users of how easy the switch may be.
It is not all that easy, but most people don't
remember what a pai
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
> to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
> users of how easy the switch may be.
For someone with zero Unix experience. It's not easy.
> I need to see an overwhelming argument that FreeBSD is a p
On Aug 9, 2007, at 10:33 AM, Reid Linnemann wrote:
Written by David Kelly on 08/09/07 12:30>>
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 06:54:37PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
For the best user experience, and Unix too: MacOS X.
a very little unix (few tools and kernel) + lots of bulky
overhead ...
Try it,
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 12:30:32PM -0500, David Kelly wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 06:54:37PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >
> > >For the best user experience, and Unix too: MacOS X.
> >
> > a very little unix (few tools and kernel) + lots of bulky overhead ...
>
> Try it, you will find o
Hello Some Person who may Be "Robert"
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:owner-freebsd-
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Latitude
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2007 9:22 PM
> To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org
> Subject: Convince me, pl
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 01:34:47PM -0500, Reid Linnemann wrote:
> Written by David Kelly on 08/09/07 12:56>>
> >
> >What "standard utility" in FreeBSD didn't start somewhere outside of
> >BSD?
>
> I'm not talking about origins, I'm talking about maintainers. The
> software you've listed are mainta
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 08:20:13PM +0200, Rolf G Nielsen wrote:
> >My ten year old niece has been brainwashed by the GUI quagmire. She saw
> >my FreeBSD 6-STABLE console on my amd64 3000+ and wanted to know why i
> >was using such an "old" computer. She had the visual aspect of the user
> >interfac
Written by David Kelly on 08/09/07 12:56>>
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 12:33:20PM -0500, Reid Linnemann wrote:
Written by David Kelly on 08/09/07 12:30>>
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 06:54:37PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
For the best user experience, and Unix too: MacOS X.
a very little unix (few t
Reid Linnemann wrote:
My ten year old niece has been brainwashed by the GUI quagmire. She saw
my FreeBSD 6-STABLE console on my amd64 3000+ and wanted to know why i
was using such an "old" computer. She had the visual aspect of the user
interface ingrained as a measure of the capabilities of t
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 12:33:20PM -0500, Reid Linnemann wrote:
> Written by David Kelly on 08/09/07 12:30>>
> >On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 06:54:37PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> >>>For the best user experience, and Unix too: MacOS X.
> >>a very little unix (few tools and kernel) + lots of bulky ov
Written by David Kelly on 08/09/07 12:30>>
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 06:54:37PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
For the best user experience, and Unix too: MacOS X.
a very little unix (few tools and kernel) + lots of bulky overhead ...
Try it, you will find otherwise. The user interface works wit
On Thu, 09 Aug 2007 12:15:08 -0500
Reid Linnemann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My ten year old niece has been brainwashed by the GUI quagmire. She
> saw my FreeBSD 6-STABLE console on my amd64 3000+ and wanted to know
> why i was using such an "old" computer. [...] Granted, it could be
> only beca
On Thu, Aug 09, 2007 at 06:54:37PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
>
> >For the best user experience, and Unix too: MacOS X.
>
> a very little unix (few tools and kernel) + lots of bulky overhead ...
Try it, you will find otherwise. The user interface works without
hassle. MacOS X comes with more
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 19:04:50 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > desktop system should be, so FreeBSD with GUI apps _is_
> > -- or can be if you want -- a "perfect desktop system".
>
> i don't use GUI. it takes a lot and gives nothing. i use both text
> and graphic (X) base
Brian Astill wrote:
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 10:02:55 pm Bob Middaugh wrote:
I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but
I'll have to say, you guys don't really present a forceful
argument to Windows users of how easy the switch may be.
The switch will not be particularly easy. Yo
Written by Wojciech Puchar on 08/09/07 12:04>>
desktop system should be, so FreeBSD with GUI apps _is_
-- or can be if you want -- a "perfect desktop system".
i don't use GUI. it takes a lot and gives nothing. i use both text and
graphic (X) based apps and no gui. i use fvwm2 with my config, t
On 8/9/07, Latitude <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
> to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
> users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD jargon
> the second I get to your webpage
It's already been mentioned, but I would strongly recommend PCBSD for
the windows convert. Having PCBSD allows me to easily setup friends
and family with systems that function more like they're used while
maintaining all FreeBSD funtionality including the ports tree, blessed
be the FreeBSD maintai
--On August 8, 2007 11:22:26 PM -0500 Latitude <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD jargon
the secon
I deeply disagree here. Any comparison between FreeBSD and window$ in
that field is bogus. What an "excellent job" is windows$ doing?
washes hundreds millions of brains, to produce constant wide enough stream
of cash to microsoft
___
freebsd-questio
argument to Windows users of how easy the switch may be.
Simple, Use a live CD. RoFreesbie, Knoppix, Ubuntu, and several
knoppix DVD is very nice. it's actually useful with not very modern (damn
cheap) computer without hard disk+pendrive or with very small hard disk.
excellent for desktop
desktop system should be, so FreeBSD with GUI apps _is_
-- or can be if you want -- a "perfect desktop system".
i don't use GUI. it takes a lot and gives nothing. i use both text and
graphic (X) based apps and no gui. i use fvwm2 with my config, there are
plenty of nice other wm's good for tha
Windows does an excellent job of running on almost any hardware. (how well it
runs is up for debate)
because hardware manufacturers make drivers. only because of that.
very little drivers was coded by microsoft by itself, contrary to FreeBSD
which has LOTS of drivers included.
and running
I don't know that such a claim is ever made from within FreeBSD. FreeBSD
is Unix, for and by those who know and love Unix. Linux is the one
that's wwhy i switched from linux to NetBSD then FreeBSD few years ago.
wanting to be a better Windows than Windows.
and getting worse windows actually
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 10:22:51 -0400
Mark Moellering <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Windows does an excellent job of running on almost any hardware.
> (how well it runs is up for debate)
> FreeBSD is also pretty good at running on just about any hardware,
> however, you may need to do some file manipu
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 10:02:55 pm Bob Middaugh wrote:
> > I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but
> > I'll have to say, you guys don't really present a forceful
> > argument to Windows users of how easy the switch may be.
Simple, Use a live CD. RoFreesbie, Knoppix, Ubuntu, and
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007 15:11:06 +0200 (CEST)
Wojciech Puchar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > a "perfectly acceptable alternative for home desktop users who have
> > previously known only Windows." It's not, and it never will be.
>
> never say never, but i wish too it will never be.
Please note that
There is a lot to your question that you may not realize. I think before
answering your question, a brief discussion of computers is appropriate.
A computer is a phenomenally complex system of parts. If you go to the
website of a major Motherboard manufacturer, you will see a huge list of
spe
Latitude wrote:
but I'll have to say, you guys don't really present a forceful
argument to Windows users of how easy the switch may be.
I suggest you not change from Windows to BSD. It looks like you're best
off with an operating system that requires little to no input on your
part to set up.
Latitude wrote:
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll
have
> to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
> users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD
jargon
> the second I get to your webpage. I need to see an overwhelm
Latitude wrote:
I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD jargon
the second I get to your webpage. I need to see an overwhelming argum
On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 11:22:26PM -0500, Latitude wrote:
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
> to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
> users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD
> jargon the second I get to y
On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Latitude wrote:
I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows,
Why?
but I'll have to say, you guys don't really present a forceful
argument to Windows users of how easy the switch may be.
FreeBSD finds users by being a quality operating system, not by trying
Latitude wrote:
I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD jargon
the second I get to your webpage. I need to see an overwhelming argum
a "perfectly acceptable alternative for home desktop users who have previously
known only Windows." It's not, and it never will be.
never say never, but i wish too it will never be.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.o
Latitude <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
> to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
> users of how easy the switch may be.
It's up to you to figure out if you like it or not. If you install it and
Local system status:
3:01AM up 521 days, 19:57, 0 users, load averages: 0.12, 0.05, 0.02
(FreeBSD 4.4)
-Grant
- Original Message -
From: Wojciech Puchar
To: Pollywog
Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: Convince me, please
In response to Latitude <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
> to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
> users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD jargon
> the second I get to your webpage.
I am a new arrival to *BSD though I have used Linux for ten years. I think
that if you want a working system right off the bat, PC-BSD or DesktopBSD
would be a better introduction for you.
The most windows-like system (of which are you talking about) is windows.
just keep with it
I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD jargon
do not "switch to freebsd". use windows if you have to "be convinced".
switch when y
Latitude wrote:
I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD jargon
the second I get to your webpage. I need to see an overwhelming argum
On 8/9/07, Latitude <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
> to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
> users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD jargon
> the second I get to your webpage
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Pollywog wrote:
>
> I hope I do not get flamed for saying this...
FreeBSDers don't flame :-)
>
> I am a new arrival to *BSD though I have used Linux for ten years. I think
> that if you want a working system right off the bat, PC-BSD or DesktopBS
There is a project based on FreeBSD that you can give a try.
Its real easy to install, got a lot of applications ported with an easy
to use interface.
You can install it and have Internet Explorer and a lot of windows
applications working in less than a couple of minutes, and there is a
virtual
On Thursday 09 August 2007 04:22:26 Latitude wrote:
> I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
> to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
> users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD jargon
> the second I get to your we
I'm interested in changing over to FreeBSD from Windows, but I'll have
to say, you guys don't really present a forceful argument to Windows
users of how easy the switch may be. I get knee-deep in FreeBSD jargon
the second I get to your webpage. I need to see an overwhelming argument
that FreeBSD i
83 matches
Mail list logo
