Am 12.02.2005 um 00:00 schrieb Johnson David:
From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Because FreeBSD is a server, not a desktop.
Agree and disagree. While FreeBSD is well suited for the server, it's
also
well suited for the desktop. That doesn't mean that we should be
stressing
the
Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
(Nevertheless, it is not time to advertise FreeBSD as a desktop
alternative.)
This is not so much about FreeBSD, as the Unix+X11 combination in
general. It does not provide the fully integrated system the typical
end-user, coming from a Windows or Mac perspective, expects.
Matthias Buelow writes:
This is not so much about FreeBSD, as the Unix+X11 combination in
general. It does not provide the fully integrated system the typical
end-user, coming from a Windows or Mac perspective, expects. That it
nevertheless works well enough for persons with a technical
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Or the city administration of Munich, which intends to move its
Windows desktops to a Linux/KDE-based installation.
Why not just burn taxpayer euro in a bonfire? It would have the same
end result and it would be faster.
Well, if you just run a set of 1-3 applications, and
Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Jeremy C. Reed writes:
Being able to run a desktop for over a hundred days without reboots,
without annoying continuous software failures, without worry of malicious
(or anoying) pop-ups, virus, and malware, and being able to quickly do my
desktop work is a good reason
Matthias Buelow writes:
Well, if you just run a set of 1-3 applications, and don't do anything
else with the computer, there shouldn't be much of a difference.
True, if those applications run identically on both platforms.
Apart from making a political statement, the advantage is
of course
Kevin Kinsey writes:
I'm guessing *you* are atypical in this.
I know that I am not. About 95% of all problems with Windows machines
are experienced by about 5% of the user base. The rest of the world has
no problems.
Most of our Windows boxes are rather stable. But our FreeBSD ones are
Jerry McAllister wrote:
Matthias Buelow writes:
And your point is..?
I can see that FreeBSD marketing has a long way to go.
To where?FreeBSD is not marketed in any particular way - on purpose.
No one wants to do it, so no one will do it.
jerry
I want to, and frequently do, market
From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Because FreeBSD is a server, not a desktop.
Agree and disagree. While FreeBSD is well suited for the server, it's also
well suited for the desktop. That doesn't mean that we should be stressing
the desktop to those shopping for servers, instead
On Feb 11, 2005, at 4:00 PM, Johnson David wrote:
From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Because FreeBSD is a server, not a desktop.
Agree and disagree. While FreeBSD is well suited for the server, it's
also
well suited for the desktop.
Anthony had the same misguided opinion in the
Johnson David wrote:
Currently Windows rules the desktop world, even for diehard Unix shops. But
that will not last forever. We need to start thinking about the desktop
today. We need to stop the official discouragement of desktop FreeBSD.
MacOS X is the Desktop BSD. It is available today, and it
Matthias Buelow writes:
MacOS X is the Desktop BSD. It is available today, and it works
better than anything else at being a desktop. Considering the sorry
state of integrated desktops on Unix today (i.e., Gnome and KDE) and
compare it with Windows, do you really think that will convince
On Sat, 2005-02-12 at 03:14 +0100, Matthias Buelow wrote:
Johnson David wrote:
Currently Windows rules the desktop world, even for diehard Unix shops. But
that will not last forever. We need to start thinking about the desktop
today. We need to stop the official discouragement of desktop
On Feb 11, 2005, at 8:32 PM, Robert Marella wrote:
On Sat, 2005-02-12 at 03:14 +0100, Matthias Buelow wrote:
Johnson David wrote:
Currently Windows rules the desktop world, even for diehard Unix
shops. But
that will not last forever. We need to start thinking about the
desktop
today. We need to
Robert Marella wrote:
MacOS X is the Desktop BSD. It is available today, and it works
better than anything else at being a desktop.
Does it work on my intel hardware?
And your point is..?
mkb.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Robert Marella writes:
Does it work on my intel hardware?
Two basic responses, one right, one wrong:
Wrong: Of course it does, you idiot! Don't you know anything about
hardware?
Right: FreeBSD easily supports the full range of Intel microprocessors
and virtually all Intel motherboards and
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
Not in public it doesn't. That is irrelevant to the discussion.
FreeBSD does not work on my PPC HW either.
Score: 12 out of 100. The meeting is over, and a security guard will
show you the door.
Try again.
--
Anthony
Matthias Buelow writes:
And your point is..?
I can see that FreeBSD marketing has a long way to go.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail
On Sat, 2005-02-12 at 04:34 +0100, Matthias Buelow wrote:
Robert Marella wrote:
MacOS X is the Desktop BSD. It is available today, and it works
better than anything else at being a desktop.
Does it work on my intel hardware?
And your point is..?
mkb.
Market share!
What
On Feb 11, 2005, at 8:49 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
Not in public it doesn't. That is irrelevant to the discussion.
FreeBSD does not work on my PPC HW either.
Score: 12 out of 100. The meeting is over, and a security guard will
show you the door.
Try again.
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
That depends on the OS to which you compare it. In isolation, FreeBSD
works on the desktop, just as most UNIX operating systems do, but in
comparison to Windows or the Mac, it's a rather sorry excuse for a
desktop. But no OS can do it all, no
Matthias Buelow writes:
And your point is..?
I can see that FreeBSD marketing has a long way to go.
To where?FreeBSD is not marketed in any particular way - on purpose.
No one wants to do it, so no one will do it.
jerry
--
Anthony
22 matches
Mail list logo
