Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 16:23 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 07:07:36AM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 13:43 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 02:16:34AM -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > > > > > > Unfortunately, anything covered by a patent, as I hinted > > > > > > above, is verboten. > > > > > > > > Er, doesn't it depend on what is patented? If the h/w itself is > > > > patented, but its software-visible interface is not, there should be > > > > no problem writing a driver for that h/w. OTOH if the algorithms > > > > used in the driver are patented it would be an infringement to > > > > reproduce them. > > > > > > I said anything covered by patent. If the software is not covered by > > > patent, you're fine to write software. Be aware, though, that a lot of > > > patents are intentionally written in a somewhat vague way so they can be > > > extended via case law at a later date. > > > > > > Nothing is "legal" under the current US system unless you can defend it > > > in civil court. That's my general rule of thumb. > > > > That doesn't sound like a good system (US not yours) - how on earth did > > it get so screwed up? (Thats rhetorical btw, I don't mean to start a > > whole discussion on that topic on this list.) > > It's much the same everywhere, from what I've seen. The problems just > arise in different guises. Usually, judging by my observations, they > arise in large part because of the common notion that a problem can be > fixed with more of the behavior that created the problem in the first > place. > > . . . but beyond that, I'd probably start a flame war, so I don't think I > want to get more specific on the list. > Probably not- the flames would probably be directed at a common enemy rather than amongst ourselves here. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 07:07:36AM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 13:43 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 02:16:34AM -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > > > > > Unfortunately, anything covered by a patent, as I hinted > > > > > above, is verboten. > > > > > > Er, doesn't it depend on what is patented? If the h/w itself is > > > patented, but its software-visible interface is not, there should be > > > no problem writing a driver for that h/w. OTOH if the algorithms > > > used in the driver are patented it would be an infringement to > > > reproduce them. > > > > I said anything covered by patent. If the software is not covered by > > patent, you're fine to write software. Be aware, though, that a lot of > > patents are intentionally written in a somewhat vague way so they can be > > extended via case law at a later date. > > > > Nothing is "legal" under the current US system unless you can defend it > > in civil court. That's my general rule of thumb. > > That doesn't sound like a good system (US not yours) - how on earth did > it get so screwed up? (Thats rhetorical btw, I don't mean to start a > whole discussion on that topic on this list.) It's much the same everywhere, from what I've seen. The problems just arise in different guises. Usually, judging by my observations, they arise in large part because of the common notion that a problem can be fixed with more of the behavior that created the problem in the first place. . . . but beyond that, I'd probably start a flame war, so I don't think I want to get more specific on the list. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Reginald Braithwaite: "Nor is it as easy as piling more features on regardless of how well they fit or whether people will actually use them. Otherwise Windows would have 97% of the market and OS X 3%. (Oh wait.)" pgpCfeJkxD9NQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 02:22:31PM -0800, Brian Whalen wrote: > Chad Perrin wrote: > > > >Tell that to the uncountable hordes of dedicated Linux users who don't > >know what they're missing and, as such, see no reason to even give > >FreeBSD a try. > > > Many Linux people I know still think FreeBSD SMP sucks, that combined > with a lack of journaling filesystem on BSD gives the Linux folks a > small edge. I know ZFS is out there, but nor for that long yet on FreeBSD. Many Linux people I know don't know about FreeBSD SMP and filesystem matters -- or much of anything else about it, for that matter. Some even think FreeBSD is a Linux distribution. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Jon Postel, RFC 761: "[B]e conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others." pgpLtzV4ihR3w.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:13:38PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > >So, we end up splitting the potential FreeBSD users between Ubuntu and > >Fedora with more of them going to Ubuntu because not quite as many become > > very nice. after trying FreeBSD they WILL get back to linux (and then > windows) quickly. > > Those who REALLY know they need something different, like high > performance good plain unix, will move to FreeBSD sooner or later :) Uh -- what? We weren't talking about people who've tried FreeBSD first. We were talking about people who asked about FreeBSD and were told to f-off to Linux instead by people like you. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Principle of Inclusion: The strength of any system is directly proportional to the power of the tools it provides for the general public. pgpDNrLdxw9Ib.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Chad Perrin wrote: Tell that to the uncountable hordes of dedicated Linux users who don't know what they're missing and, as such, see no reason to even give FreeBSD a try. Many Linux people I know still think FreeBSD SMP sucks, that combined with a lack of journaling filesystem on BSD gives the Linux folks a small edge. I know ZFS is out there, but nor for that long yet on FreeBSD. Brian ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Guys, enough! This thread is starting to spam the list. Please take this to freebsd-chat or off list. OK i wont post on that anymore. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
So, we end up splitting the potential FreeBSD users between Ubuntu and Fedora with more of them going to Ubuntu because not quite as many become very nice. after trying FreeBSD they WILL get back to linux (and then windows) quickly. Those who REALLY know they need something different, like high performance good plain unix, will move to FreeBSD sooner or later :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:51:03 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> That's not censorship -- it's a nondisclosure agreement. > > > > There are users on this list who would love to see users of FBSD > > bound by an NDA so that they could not say anything these self > > appointed "CENSORS" consider verboten. > > you are excellent at messing things up. Look who's talking.. -- Dick Hoogendijk -- PGP/GnuPG key: 01D2433D + http://nagual.nl/ | SunOS sxce snv104 ++ + All that's really worth doing is what we do for others (Lewis Carrol) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 11:34:20 -0900 Beech Rintoul wrote: > Guys, enough! This thread is starting to spam the list. > i agree too at this point and apologize for some of my earlier contributions. it is clear there will probably be no resolution between the engaging parties of which a few seem to have lost self-discipline and have been reduced to hurling insults. (despite all this i am glad to see certain posts that were quite educational such as that patent discussion.) since giorgos has made it clear that the list is not moderated, it falls upon all of us to moderate ourselves and act in a reasonable and sensible manner - and stick to the topic at hand. as the zen saying goes "even a good thing is not as good as no thing", i think the best some of us can do is not post to this thread anymore. that is the action i will take (however tempting it may be to do otherwise). -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 13:47 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:27:30PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > > > If you have done your own research then the algorithms wouldn't > > necessarily be the same- they'd nearly certainly be different, wouldn't > > they? So isn't that the basis for the patent? A patent is a registration > > of an idea. Two different ideas can still arrive at the same conclusion. > > Patents are often about methods, not algorithms. In fact, there's > supposedly a restriction against algorithms being patented -- though of > course lawmakers and people working at the patent office don't seem to > know what an algorithm is, so algorithms do get patented all the time. > > Anyway . . . as it happens, patenting a "method" provides far more broad > power than patenting an algorithm, anyway, in practice. That's one of > the reason (software) patents are so damaging. > I think I might take it up with my lawyer if I want to do something like this then. Seems like they've got it all wrapped up... My conclusion is that "it sucks and blows - something that shouldn't be physically possible". But that seems to be life atm :( (globally, not mine) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 13:43 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 02:16:34AM -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > > > > Unfortunately, anything covered by a patent, as I hinted > > > > above, is verboten. > > > > Er, doesn't it depend on what is patented? If the h/w itself is > > patented, but its software-visible interface is not, there should be > > no problem writing a driver for that h/w. OTOH if the algorithms > > used in the driver are patented it would be an infringement to > > reproduce them. > > I said anything covered by patent. If the software is not covered by > patent, you're fine to write software. Be aware, though, that a lot of > patents are intentionally written in a somewhat vague way so they can be > extended via case law at a later date. > > Nothing is "legal" under the current US system unless you can defend it > in civil court. That's my general rule of thumb. > That doesn't sound like a good system (US not yours) - how on earth did it get so screwed up? (Thats rhetorical btw, I don't mean to start a whole discussion on that topic on this list.) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 07:25:29 -0500 Jerry wrote: > Actually, I like your reference to 'Democracy'. Coming from a > socialist, the very thought of an open discussion on any matter that > does not fit in your narrow parameters would seem objectionable. > there are some serious problems with some people's conception of democracy. narrow parameters shouldn't be regarded as a bad thing necessarily. and openmindedness doesn't do much good if it results in a hole in one's head. > Might I suggest that we start with yours. I am all ready creating a > KILL filter to rid my INBOX of your useless diatribe. > i presume this means there will be no longer be insulting and angry comments directed at woj from you? like this one: > Furthermore, I believe that your are the reason that vendors are not > more interested in FreeBSD. How could any of them expect to reasonably > work with a narrow minded, opinionated, buffoon like you? -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:34:20AM -0900, Beech Rintoul wrote: > On Monday 15 December 2008 11:14:08 Chad Perrin wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:53:39PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > >>and exactly is needed on that group. it would be enough that > > > >> moderator's job will be just removing posts that classify to NTG. > > > >> NOTHING else. > > > > > > > >As long as neither you, nor anyone that thinks like you, is in charge of > > > >moderation, it might not be a *complete* disaster. > > > > > > of course it should be you to remove all my posts:) > > > > I wouldn't remove all your posts. You've said five or six things that > > were on-topic. > > Guys, enough! This thread is starting to spam the list. Please take this to > freebsd-chat or off list. > > Thanks, > > Beech Totally agree. :) -- Best regards, Jeff () X-mas ribbon campaign /\ ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 10:27:30PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > If you have done your own research then the algorithms wouldn't > necessarily be the same- they'd nearly certainly be different, wouldn't > they? So isn't that the basis for the patent? A patent is a registration > of an idea. Two different ideas can still arrive at the same conclusion. Patents are often about methods, not algorithms. In fact, there's supposedly a restriction against algorithms being patented -- though of course lawmakers and people working at the patent office don't seem to know what an algorithm is, so algorithms do get patented all the time. Anyway . . . as it happens, patenting a "method" provides far more broad power than patenting an algorithm, anyway, in practice. That's one of the reason (software) patents are so damaging. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Reginald Braithwaite: "Nor is it as easy as piling more features on regardless of how well they fit or whether people will actually use them. Otherwise Windows would have 97% of the market and OS X 3%. (Oh wait.)" pgpc6TXzxhIme.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 01:08:18PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >Actually, Pentium M processors may well be the best x86-compatible CPUs > >of their generation -- low power consumption relative to the competition, > >and the best performance per dollar in their class. Pentium 4, though, > >certainly sucks. > > as having pentium-M laptop and pentium-4 server i can only say - you are > exactly right. > > in real load my 1200Mhz laptop isn't much slower than 3Ghz pentium-4 . . . and my 1.73GHz Pentium M is faster than a 3GHz P4. I was pretty happy when I heard rumors Pentium was going to start offering tower system motherboards that accept Pentium M processors in 2003, but alas, they were just rumors. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Mediocrity corrupts. Bureaucracy corrupts absolutely. pgphTQo4tYLod.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 02:16:34AM -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > > > Unfortunately, anything covered by a patent, as I hinted > > > above, is verboten. > > Er, doesn't it depend on what is patented? If the h/w itself is > patented, but its software-visible interface is not, there should be > no problem writing a driver for that h/w. OTOH if the algorithms > used in the driver are patented it would be an infringement to > reproduce them. I said anything covered by patent. If the software is not covered by patent, you're fine to write software. Be aware, though, that a lot of patents are intentionally written in a somewhat vague way so they can be extended via case law at a later date. Nothing is "legal" under the current US system unless you can defend it in civil court. That's my general rule of thumb. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth markinct @techrepublic.com: "Don't take anything you do on-line lightly. Caveat Clicker..." pgpE84X3uWPcL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Monday 15 December 2008 11:14:08 Chad Perrin wrote: > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:53:39PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > >>and exactly is needed on that group. it would be enough that > > >> moderator's job will be just removing posts that classify to NTG. > > >> NOTHING else. > > > > > >As long as neither you, nor anyone that thinks like you, is in charge of > > >moderation, it might not be a *complete* disaster. > > > > of course it should be you to remove all my posts:) > > I wouldn't remove all your posts. You've said five or six things that > were on-topic. Guys, enough! This thread is starting to spam the list. Please take this to freebsd-chat or off list. Thanks, Beech ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 01:06:58PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > base system: nothing appropriate > > > >Maybe what we need isn't for you to keep complaining about 70% of the > >very helpful list traffic, > > helpful for whom? > > >thus producing another 5% of the list traffic > >yourself (directly, and indirectly through annoyed responses to you), but > >for someone to come up with a base-sys...@freebsd.org list where you can > >hang out and be happy. > > > seems you actively like this mailing list to become big shit. > You WELL know what i am talking about, and you just play with words. Ah -- so now you accuse me of maliciousness. How much worse can your "contributions" to this list get? > > Because i AM very much feared about FreeBSD future not being like lots of > other free software project, i will do everything to take all idiots, > winusers, "students" that want comparision between different OS in few > words (because they was required at school), questions about one of > million of non-freebsd specific software, stupid discussion about > windoze-like bloatware running under unix etc. etc. > > I really don't care about your opinion, just because it's THE ONLY GOOD > UNIX LEFT IN THE WORLD now! > > There was linux many years ago, yes - less functional, but WELL DONE, they > f...ked it up by quickly adding every stupid features requested. I still haven't figured out why you think that answering questions about DNS on FreeBSD or looking for ways to improve driver support would equate to "adding every stupid features [sic] requested." > > Then i switched to NetBSD, that worked excellent up to 1.5, > and then got f..ked up even more than linux when started to be sponsored > by "wasabisystems" and possibly other funny companies. They even changed > the way versions are numbered to get higher numbers faster ;) Did it really get screwed up, or did you just decide it *must* be getting screwed up because development was sponsored? > > Now i'm using FreeBSD and it got better each version. > Really better, not "better". A lot of people would disagree with you about the 5.x releases, judging by what I've read. By all accounts, though, it got back on track. I wonder if NetBSD got better again after you left, if it ever got worse in the first place. > > And i really want to keep it that way, because there is no alternative > now! -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth William Gibson: "The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed." pgpPqafQbetPq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 01:44:41PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> > >>moderation is needed. Things like "community social pressure" > >>simply doesn't. Like with democracy - those who are more common and > >>louder will takeover, no matter if it make sense or not. > > > >Yes, and you have gone a long way in proving just that point. Your > >narrow minded, inability to accept anyone else's opinions that are even > >slightly ajar of your own preconceived concepts are a perfect example > >of your inability to work and play well with others. > > just because my opinion is other than yours :) I think you have that backwards. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth James Madison: "If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy." pgpmiJ1zbRYfA.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 13:49 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > > I think the list you're looking for when you talk about only discussing > > the base-system already exists (probably stable or arch). This is > > freebsd questions- and the nature of the list according to the > > all-knowing handbook IS for newbies, people who probably won't > > understand the difference between third party and base. > > there is freebsd-newbies for this. > > this group is "freebsd-question" = questions about FreeBSD. > > That's THAT simple, unless you like it to be more complicated. Thats not where THE handbook sends them first, is it now? As you say RTFM. If you have a problem with this then you need to take it up with the FreeBSD Team. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:53:01PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > >That might be a valid concern if your notion of "off topic" didn't > >include things that pretty much everyone else seems to think is on topic > >enough to fit into this list. > > do we have to start deciding what's "on-topic" by voting? > congratulations > > > >> > >>i don't mean moderation like removing one opinions and not others. But > >>removing off-topic messages, that are 95% now or more. > > > >1. When moderation is increased, so too are false positives -- like > >removing statements of opinion that shouldn't be removed. > > there are always false positives. but everything is better than > "democracy"=what most say is right is considered right. I never said we should vote on everything -- you just decided to magic that up out of thin air. Have fun with that. > > > >2. Your idea of "off topic" seems to include stuff relevant to FreeBSD. > > not revelant. will you start support my program just because it can be > compiled on FreeBSD? it's nonsense. > > so stop supporting third party non-freebsd specific software just because > it can be compiled under FreeBSD!! the point: > you: \O/ | / \ -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Larry Wall: "Just don't create a file called -rf." pgp2CdB7Ml0qs.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 02:13:03PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>That's THAT simple, unless you like it to be more complicated. > > > >No there isn't. > > > >The freebsd-newbies list has been merged with freebsd-questions for > >several years now. > > > >You could have easily verified this by following the link to: > > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-newbies > > > sorry, i was sure it exist, but wasn't aware because i never wanted to > subscribe to freebsd-newbies. Funny -- I read you suggesting that it might exist, and wanted to go sign up for it so I could help out. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Thomas McCauley: "The measure of a man's real character is what he would do if he knew he would never be found out." pgpHEgtx8yA8g.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 08:14:10PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > On Sun, 2008-12-14 at 19:21 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:39:26AM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > > > > > Hence why I tend to send really green unix newbies to linux school than > > > grind their teeth on FreeBSD straight up. Let em get their skills and > > > experience in how *nix in general works on something a little easier > > > (for MIB lovers: noisy cricket), then move up to the big guns. > > > > Why not send them to something like DesktopBSD or PC-BSD, or even > > FreeSBIE (if that project is still around)? If they go to some chintzy > > user-obsequious Linux distribution like PCLinuxOS first, they'll just > > have more stuff to unlearn *if* it ever occurs to them to give some BSD > > Unix variant a try -- and if they haven't been poisoned against BSD Unix > > systems by GNU/FSF propaganda in the meantime. > > > > I doubt it. Knowing how linux works, they'll get sick of its layout and > config and appreciate the BSD way once they get the hang of handling > *nix methods. The hardware issues are across all those BSD platforms, > which makes it tougher for newbies coming from the handfed world. > Unlearning is _real_ easy when the config and layout is shit. Tell that to the uncountable hordes of dedicated Linux users who don't know what they're missing and, as such, see no reason to even give FreeBSD a try. > > As for the GNU philosophy, consider Ubuntu popularity versus Fedora. > Fedora takes "the high road", and Ubuntu allows the users to subscribe > to extra repositories of software- guess which users prefer? The threads > for these arguments on the Fedora list exceed even this one in length! > FreeBSD ports- you can install pretty much whatever license type in > software you want, as long as someone has setup a port for it. Users > consider THAT freedom. So, we end up splitting the potential FreeBSD users between Ubuntu and Fedora with more of them going to Ubuntu because not quite as many become faithful members of the GPL flock. Great. I take it you don't actually talk to Ubuntu users much, too. Lots of them are deeply invested in this copyleft thing. You don't have to use "nonfree software" to use Ubuntu, y'know. > > Plus, if you compile your own software there is a clear place to install > it, not wandering in confusion between /usr, /opt, /usr/local, and any > other variation of these (and maybe more...). > > I think freebsd is great, but if you haven't clue about *nix don't waste > time- get some bearings first on a simple similar system which offers > more user friendly features and all the cli stuff, then try the real > thing. Don't worry- those worth their salt will return, the rest will > stay where they're happy. That's why I'd recommend PC-BSD first, for most new Unix users. As an example contrary to your own, it took me *years* to get around to trying out FreeBSD once I got into Linux-land -- and someone only slightly less interested in getting out from under the GPL than I was, in the same circumstances, might *never* give it a try. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Marvin Minsky: ". . . anyone could learn Lisp in 1 day, except that if they already knew Fortran, it would take 3 days." pgpgENzw5hLiB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 01:16:23PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>It's already happening on that group that's why i talk about starting > >>moderation to remove all posts that are not about group topic! > > > >Group topic? As far as I can tell, the topic is "user questions" > > about FreeBSD Apparently you haven't noticed, but it doesn't say "about the FreeBSD Base System." -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth H. L. Mencken: "In this world of sin and sorrow, there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." pgp7OFzacbQLw.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:53:39PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> > >>and exactly is needed on that group. it would be enough that moderator's > >>job will be just removing posts that classify to NTG. NOTHING else. > > > >As long as neither you, nor anyone that thinks like you, is in charge of > >moderation, it might not be a *complete* disaster. > > > of course it should be you to remove all my posts:) I wouldn't remove all your posts. You've said five or six things that were on-topic. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Friedrich Nietzche: "Those who know that they are profound strive for clarity. Those who would like to seem profound to the crowd strive for obscurity." pgp9sKmaZB7sw.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
can this thread be closed now? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 14:12:16 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: >>> freebsd-questions User questions and technical support >> >> Exactly. Note, however, that 'user questions' means something very >> different from what you are pushing to convince everybody else :-) > > so please start to answer every possible question. for example problems > with windows ftp program. > > it's very FreeBSD-related, as user wanted to download something from > server running FreeBSD. I don't know why you are so certain that the FTP server has no bugs at all, and why it is worthless to spend some time troubleshooting this further. It may sound surprising but this sort of thing may actually lead to an *improved* FreeBSD system by finding bugs that are triggered by the particular combination of client & server. If this doesn't sound interesting to you, then that's ok. You shouldn't feel that it is a duty of yours to do anything about it. All I'm asking in this and previous posts is that you don't take such a strong stance against *others* who may feel inclined to help with the particular issue. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
That's THAT simple, unless you like it to be more complicated. No there isn't. The freebsd-newbies list has been merged with freebsd-questions for several years now. You could have easily verified this by following the link to: http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-newbies sorry, i was sure it exist, but wasn't aware because i never wanted to subscribe to freebsd-newbies. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
freebsd-questions User questions and technical support Exactly. Note, however, that 'user questions' means something very different from what you are pushing to convince everybody else :-) so please start to answer every possible question. for example problems with windows ftp program. it's very FreeBSD-related, as user wanted to download something from server running FreeBSD. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 14:06:52 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> I.e. "freebsd-quesitions" is for all FreeBSD-related questions, not >> only questions about the FreeBSD base system. > > from handbook: > > freebsd-questions User questions and technical support Exactly. Note, however, that 'user questions' means something very different from what you are pushing to convince everybody else :-) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:49:57 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> I think the list you're looking for when you talk about only >> discussing the base-system already exists (probably stable or >> arch). This is freebsd questions- and the nature of the list >> according to the all-knowing handbook IS for newbies, people who >> probably won't understand the difference between third party and >> base. > > there is freebsd-newbies for this. > > this group is "freebsd-question" = questions about FreeBSD. > > That's THAT simple, unless you like it to be more complicated. No there isn't. The freebsd-newbies list has been merged with freebsd-questions for several years now. You could have easily verified this by following the link to: http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-newbies For one more time, please stop spreading misinformation. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
I.e. "freebsd-quesitions" is for all FreeBSD-related questions, not only questions about the FreeBSD base system. from handbook: freebsd-questions User questions and technical support ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 01:49:57PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > > I think the list you're looking for when you talk about only discussing > > the base-system already exists (probably stable or arch). This is > > freebsd questions- and the nature of the list according to the > > all-knowing handbook IS for newbies, people who probably won't > > understand the difference between third party and base. > > there is freebsd-newbies for this. > > this group is "freebsd-question" = questions about FreeBSD. Not quite. It is also the list one should use to ask FreeBSD-related questions when one is not sure which list is most appropriate for that particular question. I.e. "freebsd-quesitions" is for all FreeBSD-related questions, not only questions about the FreeBSD base system. -- Erik Trulsson ertr1...@student.uu.se ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
When I say that FreeBSD is *not* a bunch elitist bastards and we do *not* like driving users away, I am aware of how serious it is to 'speak on behalf of the entire FreeBSD team' I speak only for myself. As i already wrote, i don't want FreeBSD to be turned into mainstream crap, because there are no other unices to replace it now. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
That's not censorship -- it's a nondisclosure agreement. There are users on this list who would love to see users of FBSD bound by an NDA so that they could not say anything these self appointed "CENSORS" consider verboten. you are excellent at messing things up. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
I think the list you're looking for when you talk about only discussing the base-system already exists (probably stable or arch). This is freebsd questions- and the nature of the list according to the all-knowing handbook IS for newbies, people who probably won't understand the difference between third party and base. there is freebsd-newbies for this. this group is "freebsd-question" = questions about FreeBSD. That's THAT simple, unless you like it to be more complicated. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
There are many constructive ways of improving FreeBSD. You have already submitted 7 bug reports in out bug database. If you think you can help of which at least 2 was completely ignored;) (no even response) by submitting *more* bug reports, testing FreeBSD patches, developing new FreeBSD code or writing FreeBSD documentation, you are more than welcome to do so. Driving FreeBSD users away because you think they are 'clueless morons' does *NOT* help. do help - as much as writing patches bug reports and documentation. You seem to have this twisted idea that FreeBSD is obliged to take a direction of elitism, that the FreeBSD Project is somehow supposed to do it will take a direction of "elitism" or it will be a useless crap. that's simple. Elitism isn't really good word here, because access to it isn't restricted depending of where you've born, how much money you have, what are your friends etc. You have just need to read documentation and start using it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
moderation is needed. Things like "community social pressure" simply doesn't. Like with democracy - those who are more common and louder will takeover, no matter if it make sense or not. Yes, and you have gone a long way in proving just that point. Your narrow minded, inability to accept anyone else's opinions that are even slightly ajar of your own preconceived concepts are a perfect example of your inability to work and play well with others. just because my opinion is other than yours :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 02:16 -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: > > > Unfortunately, anything covered by a patent, as I hinted > > > above, is verboten. > > Er, doesn't it depend on what is patented? If the h/w itself is > patented, but its software-visible interface is not, there should be > no problem writing a driver for that h/w. OTOH if the algorithms > used in the driver are patented it would be an infringement to > reproduce them. > > > But if I remember my legal and ethics course correctly if you > > can arrive at a conclusion through your own research then your > > reasonably clear. > > Not under patent, at least in the US, last I heard. (IANAL) > A patent is infringed by any reproduction of the technology > involved, even entirely independently. Someone described the > justification as avoiding a situation in which it would pay > to be ignorant of what others had done. > If you have done your own research then the algorithms wouldn't necessarily be the same- they'd nearly certainly be different, wouldn't they? So isn't that the basis for the patent? A patent is a registration of an idea. Two different ideas can still arrive at the same conclusion. > > For example, the drivers are closed source but the hardware itself > > is an entirely separate issue. So if you can create your own > > drivers by your own research into how the hardware is setup then > > the drivers created could licensed under your own terms- open > > source or otherwise. > > At least in the US, that works for copyright but not for patent. > > > The drivers and hardware may operate together but are separate > > items of creativity, therefore do not operate under the same > > patent. > > Again, it depends on exactly what is patented (strictly speaking, > what the patent's "claims" are.) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 12:49:43 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> >> I think that can be handled quite easily by community social >> pressure, and moderation would just set a precedent for "it's >> someone else's job". > >moderation is needed. Things like "community social pressure" >simply doesn't. Like with democracy - those who are more common and >louder will takeover, no matter if it make sense or not. Yes, and you have gone a long way in proving just that point. Your narrow minded, inability to accept anyone else's opinions that are even slightly ajar of your own preconceived concepts are a perfect example of your inability to work and play well with others. Actually, I like your reference to 'Democracy'. Coming from a socialist, the very thought of an open discussion on any matter that does not fit in your narrow parameters would seem objectionable. >It's already happening on that group that's why i talk about starting >moderation to remove all posts that are not about group topic! Might I suggest that we start with yours. I am all ready creating a KILL filter to rid my INBOX of your useless diatribe. Furthermore, I believe that your are the reason that vendors are not more interested in FreeBSD. How could any of them expect to reasonably work with a narrow minded, opinionated, buffoon like you? You concept of cooperation is: "My way, or no way." -- Jerry ges...@yahoo.com Speaking of purchasing a dog, never buy a watchdog that's on sale. After all, everyone knows a bargain dog never bites! signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:49:43PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> >> I think that can be handled quite easily by community social pressure, >> and moderation would just set a precedent for "it's someone else's job". > > moderation is needed. Things like "community social pressure" simply > doesn't. Like with democracy - those who are more common and louder will > takeover, no matter if it make sense or not. > > It's already happening on that group that's why i talk about starting > moderation to remove all posts that are not about group topic! Group topic? As far as I can tell, the topic is "user questions" (according to http://lists.freebsd.org/ and the List-Id header). Where exactly is it defined what those questions may be about? -- Benjamin M. A'Lee || mail: b...@subvert.org.uk web: http://subvert.org.uk/~bma/ || gpg: 0xBB6D2FA0 "...when two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly halfway between them. It is possible for one side to be simply wrong." -- Richard Dawkins ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 13:06:58 +0100 (CET), Wojciech Puchar wrote: > Now i'm using FreeBSD and it got better each version. Really better, > not "better". > > And i really want to keep it that way, because there is no alternative > now! There are many constructive ways of improving FreeBSD. You have already submitted 7 bug reports in out bug database. If you think you can help by submitting *more* bug reports, testing FreeBSD patches, developing new FreeBSD code or writing FreeBSD documentation, you are more than welcome to do so. Driving FreeBSD users away because you think they are 'clueless morons' does *NOT* help. You seem to have this twisted idea that FreeBSD is obliged to take a direction of elitism, that the FreeBSD Project is somehow supposed to do what _you_ think should be its direction. I'm afraid things don't work this way. If you want to set the direction of the Project you will have to go through the usual channels (become a FreeBSD developer, write a substantial part of the OS, get elected to one of the managing teams, and see what you can do about the project direction _then_). When I say that FreeBSD is *not* a bunch elitist bastards and we do *not* like driving users away, I am aware of how serious it is to 'speak on behalf of the entire FreeBSD team'. If you still doubt this, we can bring it up with the Core team. Perhaps a more official statement will be enough to make you see that driving people away because 'they are stupid Window users' is *NOT* one of the goals of FreeBSD. pgpWon70XNREB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 12:54 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> > >> Most of them don't. > > > > Considering that, the moment someone shows up and says "I'm a Windows > > user, but I'm thinking about trying out FreeBSD," you immediately assume > > the person doesn't want to learn without bothering to read any further, I > > yes. because if this person would like, he/she would read FreeBSD handbook > first! Considering my comments previously regarding this list and the handbook's direction to here for support and questions, perhaps you should follow your own advice? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 12:49 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > > I think that can be handled quite easily by community social pressure, > > and moderation would just set a precedent for "it's someone else's job". > > moderation is needed. Things like "community social pressure" > simply doesn't. Like with democracy - those who are more common and louder > will takeover, no matter if it make sense or not. > > It's already happening on that group that's why i talk about starting > moderation to remove all posts that are not about group topic! I think the list you're looking for when you talk about only discussing the base-system already exists (probably stable or arch). This is freebsd questions- and the nature of the list according to the all-knowing handbook IS for newbies, people who probably won't understand the difference between third party and base. I started here myself a long time ago, I wouldn't have the foggiest what you'd be on about if I'd have come across your comments. I hardly do now if it's any consolation, but thats more disbelief than lack of knowledge or willingness to learn. Another fact on this matter is the very point of why the reply-to of this list is not to the list itself (a matter for argument which has resurfaced on a regular basis): one does not have to be actually subscribed to this list to post to it. So of course the really fresh and uncertain ARE going to come here- this is THE first port of call. And all of this is IN the handbook. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
It's already happening on that group that's why i talk about starting moderation to remove all posts that are not about group topic! Group topic? As far as I can tell, the topic is "user questions" about FreeBSD (according to http://lists.freebsd.org/ and the List-Id header). Where exactly is it defined what those questions may be about? -- Benjamin M. A'Lee || mail: b...@subvert.org.uk web: http://subvert.org.uk/~bma/ || gpg: 0xBB6D2FA0 "...when two opposite points of view are expressed with equal intensity, the truth does not necessarily lie exactly halfway between them. It is possible for one side to be simply wrong." -- Richard Dawkins ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
i don't think that has to happen at all. personally i think self-moderation is best, followed by moderation (which i haven't found to be a bad thing). here the former seems to be dominant because of the quality of people on the list, so it is quite sufficient. this quality gets down. not because lots of smart people get dumber, but because lots of new people comes, mostly those who "heard" about FreeBSD being better than windows etc.. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Heh. "The customer is /always/ right, even when they're wrong." The difference is that you give the idiot customers exactly what they ask for, and the good customers what they actually need which cannot be done. you choose idiots or good customers, as it's effectively 2 market niches. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Actually, Pentium M processors may well be the best x86-compatible CPUs of their generation -- low power consumption relative to the competition, and the best performance per dollar in their class. Pentium 4, though, certainly sucks. as having pentium-M laptop and pentium-4 server i can only say - you are exactly right. in real load my 1200Mhz laptop isn't much slower than 3Ghz pentium-4 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
base system: nothing appropriate Maybe what we need isn't for you to keep complaining about 70% of the very helpful list traffic, helpful for whom? thus producing another 5% of the list traffic yourself (directly, and indirectly through annoyed responses to you), but for someone to come up with a base-sys...@freebsd.org list where you can hang out and be happy. seems you actively like this mailing list to become big shit. You WELL know what i am talking about, and you just play with words. Because i AM very much feared about FreeBSD future not being like lots of other free software project, i will do everything to take all idiots, winusers, "students" that want comparision between different OS in few words (because they was required at school), questions about one of million of non-freebsd specific software, stupid discussion about windoze-like bloatware running under unix etc. etc. I really don't care about your opinion, just because it's THE ONLY GOOD UNIX LEFT IN THE WORLD now! There was linux many years ago, yes - less functional, but WELL DONE, they f...ked it up by quickly adding every stupid features requested. Then i switched to NetBSD, that worked excellent up to 1.5, and then got f..ked up even more than linux when started to be sponsored by "wasabisystems" and possibly other funny companies. They even changed the way versions are numbered to get higher numbers faster ;) Now i'm using FreeBSD and it got better each version. Really better, not "better". And i really want to keep it that way, because there is no alternative now! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Most of them don't. Considering that, the moment someone shows up and says "I'm a Windows user, but I'm thinking about trying out FreeBSD," you immediately assume the person doesn't want to learn without bothering to read any further, I yes. because if this person would like, he/she would read FreeBSD handbook first! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
and exactly is needed on that group. it would be enough that moderator's job will be just removing posts that classify to NTG. NOTHING else. As long as neither you, nor anyone that thinks like you, is in charge of moderation, it might not be a *complete* disaster. of course it should be you to remove all my posts:) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
That might be a valid concern if your notion of "off topic" didn't include things that pretty much everyone else seems to think is on topic enough to fit into this list. do we have to start deciding what's "on-topic" by voting? congratulations i don't mean moderation like removing one opinions and not others. But removing off-topic messages, that are 95% now or more. 1. When moderation is increased, so too are false positives -- like removing statements of opinion that shouldn't be removed. there are always false positives. but everything is better than "democracy"=what most say is right is considered right. 2. Your idea of "off topic" seems to include stuff relevant to FreeBSD. not revelant. will you start support my program just because it can be compiled on FreeBSD? it's nonsense. so stop supporting third party non-freebsd specific software just because it can be compiled under FreeBSD!! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
I think that can be handled quite easily by community social pressure, and moderation would just set a precedent for "it's someone else's job". moderation is needed. Things like "community social pressure" simply doesn't. Like with democracy - those who are more common and louder will takeover, no matter if it make sense or not. It's already happening on that group that's why i talk about starting moderation to remove all posts that are not about group topic! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Why not send them to something like DesktopBSD or PC-BSD, or even FreeSBIE (if that project is still around)? If they go to some chintzy user-obsequious Linux distribution like PCLinuxOS first, they'll just have more stuff to unlearn *if* it ever occurs to them to give some BSD Unix variant a try -- and if they haven't been poisoned against BSD Unix systems by GNU/FSF propaganda in the meantime. it doesn't mean if they get "poisoned" or not. They don't care. They don't even understand the difference. They don't like to learn ANYTHING. They THINK they understand windows, and they THINK that's natural way of computing. They heard that linux/unix is better. That's all. sent them whatever you think, just far away from projects like FreeBSD. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 23:04:52 -0700 Chad Perrin wrote: >On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 08:57:28PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> >>bad (TM). >> > >> >No -- at *any* level: >> >> you are wrong. >> >> for example you WILL like to control what oficially your employees >> ktalk about your company. > >That's not censorship -- it's a nondisclosure agreement. There are users on this list who would love to see users of FBSD bound by an NDA so that they could not say anything these self appointed "CENSORS" consider verboten. -- Jerry ges...@yahoo.com Absence in love is like water upon fire; a little quickens, but much extinguishes it. Hannah More signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, 2008-12-14 at 19:21 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:39:26AM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > > > Hence why I tend to send really green unix newbies to linux school than > > grind their teeth on FreeBSD straight up. Let em get their skills and > > experience in how *nix in general works on something a little easier > > (for MIB lovers: noisy cricket), then move up to the big guns. > > Why not send them to something like DesktopBSD or PC-BSD, or even > FreeSBIE (if that project is still around)? If they go to some chintzy > user-obsequious Linux distribution like PCLinuxOS first, they'll just > have more stuff to unlearn *if* it ever occurs to them to give some BSD > Unix variant a try -- and if they haven't been poisoned against BSD Unix > systems by GNU/FSF propaganda in the meantime. > I doubt it. Knowing how linux works, they'll get sick of its layout and config and appreciate the BSD way once they get the hang of handling *nix methods. The hardware issues are across all those BSD platforms, which makes it tougher for newbies coming from the handfed world. Unlearning is _real_ easy when the config and layout is shit. As for the GNU philosophy, consider Ubuntu popularity versus Fedora. Fedora takes "the high road", and Ubuntu allows the users to subscribe to extra repositories of software- guess which users prefer? The threads for these arguments on the Fedora list exceed even this one in length! FreeBSD ports- you can install pretty much whatever license type in software you want, as long as someone has setup a port for it. Users consider THAT freedom. Plus, if you compile your own software there is a clear place to install it, not wandering in confusion between /usr, /opt, /usr/local, and any other variation of these (and maybe more...). I think freebsd is great, but if you haven't clue about *nix don't waste time- get some bearings first on a simple similar system which offers more user friendly features and all the cli stuff, then try the real thing. Don't worry- those worth their salt will return, the rest will stay where they're happy. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
> > Unfortunately, anything covered by a patent, as I hinted > > above, is verboten. Er, doesn't it depend on what is patented? If the h/w itself is patented, but its software-visible interface is not, there should be no problem writing a driver for that h/w. OTOH if the algorithms used in the driver are patented it would be an infringement to reproduce them. > But if I remember my legal and ethics course correctly if you > can arrive at a conclusion through your own research then your > reasonably clear. Not under patent, at least in the US, last I heard. (IANAL) A patent is infringed by any reproduction of the technology involved, even entirely independently. Someone described the justification as avoiding a situation in which it would pay to be ignorant of what others had done. > For example, the drivers are closed source but the hardware itself > is an entirely separate issue. So if you can create your own > drivers by your own research into how the hardware is setup then > the drivers created could licensed under your own terms- open > source or otherwise. At least in the US, that works for copyright but not for patent. > The drivers and hardware may operate together but are separate > items of creativity, therefore do not operate under the same > patent. Again, it depends on exactly what is patented (strictly speaking, what the patent's "claims" are.) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 2008-12-15 at 02:11 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 05:11:00PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > > > But if I remember my legal and ethics course correctly if you can arrive > > at a conclusion through your own research then your reasonably clear. > > For example, the drivers are closed source but the hardware itself is an > > entirely separate issue. So if you can create your own drivers by your > > own research into how the hardware is setup then the drivers created > > could licensed under your own terms- open source or otherwise. > > > > The drivers and hardware may operate together but are separate items of > > creativity, therefore do not operate under the same patent. > > Be very careful. Even in the US, where there's a presumption of > innocence built into criminal law, the presumption of innocence doesn't > apply in civil court. > Well thats what they teach in university- recently too. If you can show evidence that you arrived at your own conclusion without reverse engineering then your free and clear. Keep in mind though that that IS only in theory... although I personally would consider that just. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 05:11:00PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > But if I remember my legal and ethics course correctly if you can arrive > at a conclusion through your own research then your reasonably clear. > For example, the drivers are closed source but the hardware itself is an > entirely separate issue. So if you can create your own drivers by your > own research into how the hardware is setup then the drivers created > could licensed under your own terms- open source or otherwise. > > The drivers and hardware may operate together but are separate items of > creativity, therefore do not operate under the same patent. Be very careful. Even in the US, where there's a presumption of innocence built into criminal law, the presumption of innocence doesn't apply in civil court. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Principle of Exclusion: The strength of any system is inversely proportional to the restrictions on the power of tools allowed to the general public by that system. pgp4Hm458TpGv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, 2008-12-14 at 23:53 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 02:50:00PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 14:25 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > > > > > > I think he's trying to say that open source drivers would be preferable, > > > and to develop them we'd need the hardware specs so we'd have a target > > > toward which to develop drivers. Of course, "preferable" is my choice of > > > term -- he seems to be more of the opinion that anything that isn't > > > strictly open source should just be shunned, out of hand. While it would > > > be nice if that was a practical option, it isn't really, at this point. > > > > > > > Perhaps he'd be more at home in the Fedora community which are adamant > > about that too... :P > > Perhaps so. > > OpenBSD is pretty adamant about that, too -- more so than Fedora, I > think. In fact, the OpenBSD project seems to be the most adamant open > source OS project, about keeping everything open (except the format of > the installer, for some inconsistent as hell damned reason), that I've > seen. > > > > > > > > Actually, patents are publicly documented by definition -- we're just not > > > *allowed* to use it, once it has been patented, without permission. The > > > sort of thing they don't want to divulge is trade secrets, which you > > > meantioned -- not patents, which you also mentioned. For some reason, > > > though, some hardware vendors seem inclined to use patents as an excuse > > > for keeping secrets, which never made much sense to me. > > > > > > IANAL, though I read about the law from time to time. > > > > Ok, so moving forward on this point: How exactly does this help in > > developing drivers for FreeBSD? Patents are ideas- right? So wouldn't > > this mean that it would still require "guessing" and estimation of what > > should happen and how to do it? > > The problem with open source driver development is lack of documented > implementation details and the illegality of reproducing anything covered > by patent -- not lack of patent documentation. > > > > > > You also mention that they're publicly accessible- how? Whats the portal > > and how would you search for required device? > > I don't do patent searches regularly, but I'd probably start with the US > Patent Office site. > > Okay, I did a Google search for USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark > Office), clicked the first link, clicked through a menu item, and found > this page: > > http://patft.uspto.gov/ > > Unfortunately, anything covered by a patent, as I hinted above, is > verboten. > But if I remember my legal and ethics course correctly if you can arrive at a conclusion through your own research then your reasonably clear. For example, the drivers are closed source but the hardware itself is an entirely separate issue. So if you can create your own drivers by your own research into how the hardware is setup then the drivers created could licensed under your own terms- open source or otherwise. The drivers and hardware may operate together but are separate items of creativity, therefore do not operate under the same patent. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 07:03:55 + Matthew Seaman wrote: > Heh. "The customer is /always/ right, even when they're wrong." The > difference is that you give the idiot customers exactly what they ask > for, and the good customers what they actually need > now that is a business model!! if i ever go into business again, i'll have to remember your wise words :D -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 23:12:28 -0700 Chad Perrin wrote: > I think that can be handled quite easily by community social pressure, > and moderation would just set a precedent for "it's someone else's > job". > i don't think that has to happen at all. personally i think self-moderation is best, followed by moderation (which i haven't found to be a bad thing). here the former seems to be dominant because of the quality of people on the list, so it is quite sufficient. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
prad wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 11:54:19 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: in my practice rejecting part of customers (those who are really "idiots") make sense. you get say 20% less money for 10 times less work. exactly! proper advocacy on a 'free' (or otherwise) system doesn't mean accommodating ridiculous demands. there needs to be a certain level of sincerity on part of the customers. only the right customers are always right. Heh. "The customer is /always/ right, even when they're wrong." The difference is that you give the idiot customers exactly what they ask for, and the good customers what they actually need Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 02:50:00PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 14:25 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > > > > I think he's trying to say that open source drivers would be preferable, > > and to develop them we'd need the hardware specs so we'd have a target > > toward which to develop drivers. Of course, "preferable" is my choice of > > term -- he seems to be more of the opinion that anything that isn't > > strictly open source should just be shunned, out of hand. While it would > > be nice if that was a practical option, it isn't really, at this point. > > > > Perhaps he'd be more at home in the Fedora community which are adamant > about that too... :P Perhaps so. OpenBSD is pretty adamant about that, too -- more so than Fedora, I think. In fact, the OpenBSD project seems to be the most adamant open source OS project, about keeping everything open (except the format of the installer, for some inconsistent as hell damned reason), that I've seen. > > > > Actually, patents are publicly documented by definition -- we're just not > > *allowed* to use it, once it has been patented, without permission. The > > sort of thing they don't want to divulge is trade secrets, which you > > meantioned -- not patents, which you also mentioned. For some reason, > > though, some hardware vendors seem inclined to use patents as an excuse > > for keeping secrets, which never made much sense to me. > > > > IANAL, though I read about the law from time to time. > > Ok, so moving forward on this point: How exactly does this help in > developing drivers for FreeBSD? Patents are ideas- right? So wouldn't > this mean that it would still require "guessing" and estimation of what > should happen and how to do it? The problem with open source driver development is lack of documented implementation details and the illegality of reproducing anything covered by patent -- not lack of patent documentation. > > You also mention that they're publicly accessible- how? Whats the portal > and how would you search for required device? I don't do patent searches regularly, but I'd probably start with the US Patent Office site. Okay, I did a Google search for USPTO (United States Patent and Trademark Office), clicked the first link, clicked through a menu item, and found this page: http://patft.uspto.gov/ Unfortunately, anything covered by a patent, as I hinted above, is verboten. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Martin Luther: "Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying the object which is abused. Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we then prohibit and abolish women?" pgpbuS5vKSnXc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 02:31:17PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > What I can't equate with is why its acceptable for intel to do the > same... check if_iwi and its "firmware". No other wifi device (that I'm > aware of- at least they'd be in the minority anyway) works this way. The > excuse is fcc regs- I doubt that... Atheros drivers used closed firmware until very recently. Some of them still do. > > And before anyone defends intel: I've spent a lot of time wasted on > making their stupid nics to work in windows, I usually just flick em and > put in a rl nic. The cpus are shit as well- I've had no end of trouble > with them, plus too hot, power hungry etc. Alas, finding a decent > notebook with an alternative has been to no avail... Actually, Pentium M processors may well be the best x86-compatible CPUs of their generation -- low power consumption relative to the competition, and the best performance per dollar in their class. Pentium 4, though, certainly sucks. The first generation of Celeron processors were kick-ass x86-compatible CPUs for their time, too -- actually better than Intel intended them to be. Weird how that happens. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth William Gibson: "The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed." pgp3j5UI6c2Fo.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 09:42:32PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >probably that they would create "competitors" somehow, magically, without > >providing any information that directly encourages competition for their > >hardware. If they wanted to provide per-incident paid software support > >or simply charge people extra for drivers, *then* I could see this being > >a problem, but I haven't seen a whole lot of that kind of rent-seeking > >behavior from graphics adapter vendors. > > i don't see any problem. There is a product - for example Nvidia > powersuckers^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hfull 3D accellerators. Their can this, that, > blah, blah and blah, they don't have FreeBSD support. > > There are other products, they can this that blah blah and have FreeBSD > support. > > You need blah blah and blah under FreeBSD, you don't buy nvidia. > > end of topic. I've responded to this attitude of yours in another subthread. I don't remember exactly where, but I mentioned terms like "laptop" and "package deal" (or something to that effect) a bit. Please address that before you go bandying this weak "argument" around any more. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth William Gibson: "The future is already here. It's just not very evenly distributed." pgpoBR5HY02rZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 04:49:28PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>>Off topic=not about FreeBSD OS. > >> > >>I'm amazed that you seem to think that making FreeBSD do what one wants > >>it to do isn't a FreeBSD topic. > > > >exactly... > >when is something part of FBSD and when not? > > what is "base system" ~> whatis 'base system' base system: nothing appropriate Maybe what we need isn't for you to keep complaining about 70% of the very helpful list traffic, thus producing another 5% of the list traffic yourself (directly, and indirectly through annoyed responses to you), but for someone to come up with a base-sys...@freebsd.org list where you can hang out and be happy. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Power corrupts. The command line corrupts absolutely. pgpkfKIy3jlMp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:03:29AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > >You remind me of a tech I once worked with who thought all customers > >were stupid. Maybe they were... > > the difference is that FreeBSD is free software. > > or is not? Perhaps you are not familiar with the term "analogy". RTFD(ictionary). -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] John W. Russell: "People point. Sometimes that's just easier. They also use words. Sometimes that's just easier. For the same reasons that pointing has not made words obsolete, there will always be command lines." pgp5dpV91VMEd.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 08:04:18PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >than not you discourage beginners from getting interested in this > > i don't discourage beginners that want to learn. > > Most of them don't. Considering that, the moment someone shows up and says "I'm a Windows user, but I'm thinking about trying out FreeBSD," you immediately assume the person doesn't want to learn without bothering to read any further, I don't think you actually have any way of knowing whether anyone wants to learn most of the time. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Colin McFadyen: "Unix is not an 'a-ha' experience, it is more of a 'holy-shit' experience." pgp0ujXW5weRC.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:49:58PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > > > >you're reply to another post: > >>If you wish you can call me "fuhrer" ;) but iwth Gestapo you certainly > >>got too far. > >> > >:D > >good response to that unfortunate eruption of enthusiasm. > > i think it's a problem of fear about past consorship in many countries. > But this is completely different things. > Moderation is not censorship like that, as EVERYONE can create it's own > mailing lists :) > > >moderation would definitely not be a bad thing in some situations! > > and exactly is needed on that group. it would be enough that moderator's > job will be just removing posts that classify to NTG. NOTHING else. As long as neither you, nor anyone that thinks like you, is in charge of moderation, it might not be a *complete* disaster. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Peter Norvig: "Use the most natural notation available to solve the problem, and then worry about writing an interpreter for that notation." pgpCAvobQoWk7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 09:38:29PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > without moderation it's a mess. I've seen more mess in response to your entirely unwelcoming manner than ever in response to anything you call "off topic" in some of your examples. > > It's nice people like to help other people, but it's bad it helps them on > that lists with OFF-TOPIC problems. That might be a valid concern if your notion of "off topic" didn't include things that pretty much everyone else seems to think is on topic enough to fit into this list. > > i don't mean moderation like removing one opinions and not others. But > removing off-topic messages, that are 95% now or more. 1. When moderation is increased, so too are false positives -- like removing statements of opinion that shouldn't be removed. 2. Your idea of "off topic" seems to include stuff relevant to FreeBSD. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Bjarne Stroustrup: "An ugly operation should have an ugly syntactic form." pgpAWYilAIkwq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:26:21PM -0800, prad wrote: > On Sat, 13 Dec 2008 12:43:02 -0700 > Chad Perrin wrote: > > > I'll > > provide a technical example, as opposed to a social example, so maybe > > you'll be able to understand my point ... > > > good illustrative examples, chad! > > i think moderation has value if it is done reasonably. for instance, > people who talk about foreign currency values on a freebsd list should > be watched very closely. I think that can be handled quite easily by community social pressure, and moderation would just set a precedent for "it's someone else's job". > > woj made a good point in another post i think in that he's happy > helping beginners who really do wish to learn. i know i've come across > some who think the world owes them everything and make ridiculous > demands on a list (not to mention ot posts - and they aren't even > trying to sell you anything!). > > however, in general i like giorgos' comment the best that he was helped > a decade ago and he's returning that favor. so in that respect, i agree > with your 'false positives' concern - innocent till proven guilty! Thank you. > > anyone know if there are moderators for this list? > > i know there are some very nice people who keep watch. once i messaged > the test list with a ports question (i was having trouble emailing this > one - so i was testing to see if there was some problem in general), > and a very considerate person from freebsd.org, Remko Lodder, emailed > me asking if i knew that i was emailing the test list. i found it > really decent that people look out for others here! Me too -- and I'm glad you weren't told to go away and email a different list because ports questions are "off topic" for the test list. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Martin Luther: "Do not suppose that abuses are eliminated by destroying the object which is abused. Men can go wrong with wine and women. Shall we then prohibit and abolish women?" pgp2GVQt5JEEZ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 08:57:28PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >>bad (TM). > > > >No -- at *any* level: > > you are wrong. > > for example you WILL like to control what oficially your employees > ktalk about your company. That's not censorship -- it's a nondisclosure agreement. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Thomas McCauley: "The measure of a man's real character is what he would do if he knew he would never be found out." pgpeSrRuXHyYn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 11:39:26AM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > Hence why I tend to send really green unix newbies to linux school than > grind their teeth on FreeBSD straight up. Let em get their skills and > experience in how *nix in general works on something a little easier > (for MIB lovers: noisy cricket), then move up to the big guns. Why not send them to something like DesktopBSD or PC-BSD, or even FreeSBIE (if that project is still around)? If they go to some chintzy user-obsequious Linux distribution like PCLinuxOS first, they'll just have more stuff to unlearn *if* it ever occurs to them to give some BSD Unix variant a try -- and if they haven't been poisoned against BSD Unix systems by GNU/FSF propaganda in the meantime. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] Quoth Edward Murphy, Jr. (Murphy's Law): "If there's more than one way to do a job and one of those ways will end in disaster, then someone will do it that way." pgp5tBk9XsuQ7.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
per...@pluto.rain.com wrote: after reading all these posts, i've still come up with this answer after looking .. "freebsd - the power to serve" Might one reasonably surmise that "the power to serve" implies doing a good job of running server software? Like mail servers, FTP servers, web servers, file servers, database servers, ssh servers, even - gasp - X11 servers? sure. but X11's motto is not X11 - the power of freebsd amd64 with nvidia card ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 11:54:19 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: > in my practice rejecting part of customers (those who are really > "idiots") make sense. you get say 20% less money for 10 times less > work. > exactly! proper advocacy on a 'free' (or otherwise) system doesn't mean accommodating ridiculous demands. there needs to be a certain level of sincerity on part of the customers. only the right customers are always right. -- In friendship, prad ... with you on your journey Towards Freedom http://www.towardsfreedom.com (website) Information, Inspiration, Imagination - truly a site for soaring I's ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Julien Cigar(jci...@ulb.ac.be)@2008.12.11 16:23:04 +0100: > "except when i forgot to unmount" -> yep, the problem lies here, it's so > natural to just unplug an USB device That's not an excuse for the kernel panic. The real problem is the kernel code rot. They can't fix the problem because the code has grown too complex and unwiedly. They need to reengineer/rewrite some kernel systems. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Off topic=not about FreeBSD OS. I'm amazed that you seem to think that making FreeBSD do what one wants it to do isn't a FreeBSD topic. exactly... when is something part of FBSD and when not? what is "base system" all the ports aren't? port system (script and Makefiles) are part of FreeBSD, but there is group dedicated to it: freebsd-ports port system allows to compile and install various unix tools on FreeBSD. but this tools are completely third party thing. so dhcpd is not part of FBSD either? yes. it's name even states it clearly: isc-dhcpd :) where does that philosophy ends then? is sendmail part of FBSD...? yes - it's included in FreeBSD base system. maybe the whole userland isn't and FreeBSD is just a kernel? no. it's not linux. what you can build through "make buildworld" is FreeBSD. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
SO - please just stop ALL NTG topics here. this group really lacks moderator. not someone that will remove posts he considers "lame" but all that is off topic. Off topic=not about FreeBSD OS. I'm amazed that you seem to think that making FreeBSD do what one wants it to do isn't a FreeBSD topic. exactly... when is something part of FBSD and when not? all the ports aren't? so dhcpd is not part of FBSD either? where does that philosophy ends then? is sendmail part of FBSD...? maybe the whole userland isn't and FreeBSD is just a kernel? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Your talking about things without providing any evidence as usual. It's just bollocks. NVidia has fabulous 3dgraphics cards and their drivers work very very well. At least they do on solaris (32/64bit). ...and Mac OSX and Linux and even Windows well is said too much at least compared to advertised performance of their GPU. but it works. anyway it's NTG, ask nvidia to write needed kernel module (as they say they need it) for FreeBSD, or make their hardware documentation fully open so other may write it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On 12 dec 2008, at 21:54, dick hoogendijk wrote: On Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:35:59 +0100 (CET) Wojciech Puchar wrote: They do this to hide their hardware faults that way - that's the true reason they do this. With new hardware produced every year it MUST be buggy and certainly there are thousands of hardware bugs. with "secret" drivers - they can easily hide them. AFAIK at least half of their driver code are to do workaround of their hardware bugs. Your talking about things without providing any evidence as usual. It's just bollocks. NVidia has fabulous 3dgraphics cards and their drivers work very very well. At least they do on solaris (32/64bit). ...and Mac OSX and Linux and even Windows ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On 12 dec 2008, at 20:32, Wojciech Puchar wrote: I disagree. I believe, rather, that support for closed hardware specs isn't *as* important -- but is still at least somewhat important. My reservation to the 3D driver thing is it is setting a very dangerous precedent if the solution involves allowing a third party commercial enterprise to dictate features FreeBSD "must include" before they will support it. NVidia MUST INCLUDE full documentation of their hardware. this is normal - hardware manufacturer produces hardware, programmers do make support for it. what is common today isn't normal. did FreeBSD change to GPL? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Da Rock writes: > I'm sorry, but the only image I could conjure up for a > pointy-haired boss was Bart Simpson in a suit (or Lisa as > President) :D > > Do you have another image in mind? You are obviously not familiar with the comic strip "Dilbert" written by Scott Adams. Please fix this before continiung to breathe. :-) Robert Huff ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
with "secret" drivers - they can easily hide them. AFAIK at least half of their driver code are to do workaround of their hardware bugs. Actually that sounds like a very close approximation of what is going on. It explains why cpu usage can go up some times during use. another example. Part of AMD phenom CPUs have TLB cache bug - actually making in unusable for anything serious. But - this CPUs are still available for sale. not as "broken" but as new. you won't even get informed about it when buying, Why? because people accepted it ;) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
are thousands of hardware bugs. with "secret" drivers - they can easily hide them. AFAIK at least half of their driver code are to do workaround of their hardware bugs. Actually that sounds like a very close approximation of what is going most "high end" popular products are just buggy. as long as most people buy them just to be "better" than friend that bought older model half year ago - they will keep producing this shit. Really well hardware can be made, but not with half year production cycle. at least 3 years. What I can't equate with is why its acceptable for intel to do the same... check if_iwi and its "firmware". No other wifi device (that I'm aware of- maybe you need check more :) put in a rl nic. The cpus are shit as well- I've had no end of trouble with them, plus too hot, power hungry etc. as most people liked ;) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 16:05:26 +1000 Da Rock wrote: >On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 13:05 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: >> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:46:55AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> > >>>I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here. >> > >> >> > >>exactly what i wrote. the problem is that people like You (and >> > >>millions others) are willing to buy product without any >> > >>documentation. >> > > >> > >You may find this surprising, but sometimes circumstances lead >> > >people to make purchases of "total package" products rather than >> > >building something >> > >> > there are products for them. >> >> In other words, your answer seems to be: >> >> "We don't want users who like FreeBSD, but want to use it on a >> laptop. FreeBSD should never be used on a laptop." >> >> I'd say I can safely ignore you, knowing that's your attitude, if it >> weren't for the fact that a lot of other people won't know that down >> the line, and you may permanently damage the FreeBSD project by >> chasing off potential contributors. >> >> Is there any way I can get you to stop being such a contentious >> trojan horse of an enemy to the FreeBSD project? >> > >If one were spiritually minded one might see another reason behind >this. Reminds me of a posting I recently saw on Slashdot: (paraphrased) Criticizing FreeBSD = Flame Bait; Criticizing MS Windows = Insightful -- Jerry ges...@yahoo.com Remember that there is an outside world to see and enjoy. Hans Liepmann signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
related things. Ideally developers are self-motivated. They do it because they want to, not because they have to or because they won't get paid if they don't[+]. It's not an entirely black and white distinction -- after all, employees aren't slaves. If they really can't stand being nice to the idiot customers, they always have the option of seeking alternative employment. or going on your own. in my practice rejecting part of customers (those who are really "idiots") make sense. you get say 20% less money for 10 times less work. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Matthew Seaman < m.sea...@infracaninophile.co.uk> wrote: > Glen Barber wrote: > >> On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:03 AM, Wojciech Puchar >> wrote: >> >>> You remind me of a tech I once worked with who thought all customers were stupid. Maybe they were... >>> the difference is that FreeBSD is free software. >>> >>> or is not? >>> >> >> How is that relevant? >> >> > The tech was being paid to do a job, so he really was contractually obliged > to be nice to the customers. FreeBSD isn't under any sort of obligation, > contractual or otherwise to do anything. > > Well, apart from the exceptions where developers have been hired or given > grants to implement bits of functionality, or companies have decided to > task > their employees with developing FreeBSD drivers[*]. Even so, while the > obligation of any individual may not be directly to the FreeBSD project > itself, > the result is effectively just that. > > Not to mention the moral obligation that developers accept to debug and > maintain > the code that they give to the project. Sure, no one can demand that a > developer > drop everything and /fix/ /this/ /now/ but most developers, most of the > time, > will respond extremely quickly to well-formed bug reports concerning their > areas > of interest. > > The difference is the degree and nature of the motivation to work on > FreeBSD > related things. Ideally developers are self-motivated. They do it because > they want to, not because they have to or because they won't get paid if > they > don't[+]. It's not an entirely black and white distinction -- after all, > employees aren't slaves. If they really can't stand being nice to the > idiot > customers, they always have the option of seeking alternative employment. >Cheers, > There being no more need to add anything, with that simple and clear clarification from Dr. Matthew, let us all bow and say Amen! to this thread. Amen. -- Best regards, Odhiambo WASHINGTON, Nairobi,KE +254733744121/+254722743223 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ "Okay guys. This is Kenya. You pay taxes because you feel philanthropic, unlike our MPs!" -- Kenneth Marende, Speaker, 10th Parilament. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
Glen Barber wrote: On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:03 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote: You remind me of a tech I once worked with who thought all customers were stupid. Maybe they were... the difference is that FreeBSD is free software. or is not? How is that relevant? The tech was being paid to do a job, so he really was contractually obliged to be nice to the customers. FreeBSD isn't under any sort of obligation, contractual or otherwise to do anything. Well, apart from the exceptions where developers have been hired or given grants to implement bits of functionality, or companies have decided to task their employees with developing FreeBSD drivers[*]. Even so, while the obligation of any individual may not be directly to the FreeBSD project itself, the result is effectively just that. Not to mention the moral obligation that developers accept to debug and maintain the code that they give to the project. Sure, no one can demand that a developer drop everything and /fix/ /this/ /now/ but most developers, most of the time, will respond extremely quickly to well-formed bug reports concerning their areas of interest. The difference is the degree and nature of the motivation to work on FreeBSD related things. Ideally developers are self-motivated. They do it because they want to, not because they have to or because they won't get paid if they don't[+]. It's not an entirely black and white distinction -- after all, employees aren't slaves. If they really can't stand being nice to the idiot customers, they always have the option of seeking alternative employment. Cheers, Matthew [*] I'm thinking of the Intel NICs that Jack Vogel maintains in particular here. [+] Although being paid to do what you would be doing anyhow is always nice. -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 18:46 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 04:47:23PM -0800, prad wrote: > > On Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:11:25 -0700 > > Chad Perrin wrote: > > > > > His manner of expressing his feelings seems to be to try to crush > > > others' beneath his heel. Try examining the definition of the word > > > "fair" before you use it in the future. > > > > > ok, chad, here's what you find on dictionary.com that are relevant: > > 1. free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice: a fair decision; a fair > > judge. > > 2. legitimately sought, pursued, done, given, etc.; proper > > under the rules: a fair fight. > > My point exactly -- you rush to his defense, making statements that seem > intended to skewer me for things he has done. I don't consider that the > epitome of fairness. > > > > > > ok no one is really free from bias when it comes to these things. as > > shaw (i think) once wrote "an unbiased opinion isn't worth a damn". > > > > i do not think you have provided specific evidence that he has been > > dishonesty or unjust ... much less so that he has even been incorrect. > > Let's take, as an example, the link I provided in response to a comment > of his that prompted a couple people to defend him. I've given him that > URL three or four times in the last year, in direct response to some > statement he has made suggesting that FreeBSD desktops simply cannot > compare with MS Windows desktops in terms of flashiness, bells and > whistles, et cetera. Each time, I have very clearly stated my > disagreement with his estimation of FreeBSD as being thoroughly beaten by > MS Windows in that area, with that URL provided as evidence to back my > claim. > > Each time, he has completely ignored what I said and the URL I provided. > He keeps coming back to make exactly the same sort of claims he has > before, utterly failing to addresses arguments against his hand-waving > statements without any logical or evidenciary support. Nobody else has > bothered to dispute what I've said, either. > > In absence of, at *minimum*, some half-assed attempt to make a case > against what I've provided, I will continue to regard his repetition of > disputed, unsupported statements to be dishonest or at least wildly > inaccurate. That's generally how *reasonable* people treat hand-waving > arguments like his, with no logical or evidenciary support -- nor even > personal, anecdotal support -- when they are disputed by a > counterargument *with support*. > > Would you prefer I just accept his statements, which fly in the face of > my own experience, even after he fails to answer supported disputations > of their content, just because it's him and you say he has to be right > about everything? > > Even if his statement itself isn't dishonest, his unwillingness to either > back away from it or offer a counterargument when it is effectively > disputed is dishonest. He pretends there is no other side to the matter, > no other valid opinion, yet resolutely refuses to acknowledge such "other > side" arguments when they arise. > > I use an example of my own statements only because I'm most familiar with > my own statements -- not because others do not exist. > > > > > > and as far as 'sticking to the rules', he hasn't abused anyone from > > any of the posts i recall reading, so within the terms of conduct of > > an email list, i don't find your picturesque expression 'crush others > > beneath his heel' legitimate. > > I guess you haven't been reading very closely. > > > > > > > If he just said "If this doesn't suit your needs, try something > > > else," I wouldn't have a problem. Telling people patent falsehoods > > > about how FreeBSD simply can't do what other OSes can, even in cases > > > where FreeBSD can do them *better* than those other OSes, in an > > > attempt to drive away anyone that might be looking at FreeBSD as a > > > possible migration path, is rather suboptimal in my opinion, however. > > > > > it would be suboptimal, if it were true. however, i really can't recall > > anything of the sort, chad - ever. and certainly not in this thread. i > > also don't understand why you think he'd be even motivated to do this. > > of what possible interest could it be for him to drive others away from > > freebsd? > > Oh, poppycock. Go back and read the very post to which I responded when > I called him a troll. Notice how he says things that seem carefully > calculated to make people think "Oh, this FreeBSD thing obviously sucks > as a desktop OS." Take off the blinders. > > I have no idea why he'd be motivated to do that. I'm not him. All I > know is what I've seen him do increasingly often over the last year. I can actually confirm this observation over the past year and beyond. It has begun innocently enough in the past couple of years and has grown in intensity since. I don't particularly want to be drawn into this debate, but this does seem to be rather one sided argument. My philo
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 10:37 -0800, prad wrote: > On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:51:22 +1000 > Da Rock wrote: > > > The possibility here is the bells and whistles strangely enough DO > > work in tune and without sore lips... FreeBSD could be THAT good. > > > i'm not so sure that is really "THAT good". bells and whistles if not > carefully thought out and implemented can add to instability. possibly > more important, they can pervert the original good idea. > > i think the newer kde's is a case in point (from my personal > experience, albeit). version 3 was good (despite the occasional > crash). version 4 seemed to try to do all sorts of stuff and outdo > windoze at being windoze. i'm using dwm :D > > i think this issue was dealt with rather well in the openbsd faq: > - > 1.10 - Can I use OpenBSD as a desktop system? > This question is often asked in exactly this manner -- with no > explanation of what the asker means by "desktop". The only person who > can answer that question is you, as it depends on what your needs and > expectations are. > > While OpenBSD has a great reputation as a "server" operating system, it > can be and is used on the desktop. Many "desktop" applications are > available through packages and ports. As with all operating system > decisions, the question is: can it do the job you desire in the way you > wish? You must answer this question for yourself. > http://openbsd.org/faq/faq1.html#Desktop > - > > while i agree with you as far as having suitable driver accessibility, i > don't see why one system needs to try to be all things to all people. > All this is a fair comment. In particular the reply to "bells and whistles". My main concern with KDE4 (now that I've seen it) is that while the bells and whistles are there, they don't seem "complete" there are still at least the little aesthetics to fix- not to mention the crashes, inoperability, etc. While it outdoes window$ on functional stability etc, I think they may have jumped the gun on this one. A more polished and "complete" product later would have far more success- take time for all the little things: if its there it SHOULD work properly. As for who and why should use it: thats for the intellects to argue. My only argument is if the jobs worth doing do it properly the first time. I think what many get up in arms about is what the system should be capable of doing. And yes there are many more comments on the multimedia list- which should be saying something to people: there is no other system out there that is sufficient for their needs, so they come to the only operating system that has the strength, speed, and stability to offer a possibility of what they want (I'm one of them). Linux isn't up to scratch although driver support is better, but it doesn't hold up under the kind of stresses being placed on it for this level of work. There are many uses that FreeBSD is up to the challenge with operationally but doesn't have the driver support. Even if a link is created between linux and BSD driver wise (temporarily until native support) the stability of FreeBSD can counter more of the inconsistencies in the driver software. On top of that, there are more hardware vendors making more new products FOR SERVERS that there is no driver support for. Gone are the days when one vendor sells the chipset to many different hardware implementations; now there are many chipsets for the same hardware types, so more drivers need to be written for the new hardware coming out on a continual basis. Plus what is considered to be a server has changed over the years compared to what some on this list may be used to. Consider video streaming (where does the stream originate from?), sound streaming, 3D rendering, physics computation, X services; in this climate of cloud computing there is going to be a lot more coming. Food for thought anyway. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 21:35 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > >> NVidia MUST INCLUDE full documentation of their hardware. > >> this is normal - hardware manufacturer produces hardware, programmers > >> do make support for it. > >> > >> what is common today isn't normal. > > > > I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here. > > exactly what i wrote. the problem is that people like You (and millions > others) are willing to buy product without any documentation. > > if you think they do this to hide their hardware secrets you are wrong. > See x86 instruction set - does it reveal how Intel or Amd made their > processor so fast? no! > > They do this to hide their hardware faults that way - that's the true > reason they do this. > > With new hardware produced every year it MUST be buggy and certainly there > are thousands of hardware bugs. > > with "secret" drivers - they can easily hide them. AFAIK at least half of > their driver code are to do workaround of their hardware bugs. Actually that sounds like a very close approximation of what is going on. It explains why cpu usage can go up some times during use. What I can't equate with is why its acceptable for intel to do the same... check if_iwi and its "firmware". No other wifi device (that I'm aware of- at least they'd be in the minority anyway) works this way. The excuse is fcc regs- I doubt that... And before anyone defends intel: I've spent a lot of time wasted on making their stupid nics to work in windows, I usually just flick em and put in a rl nic. The cpus are shit as well- I've had no end of trouble with them, plus too hot, power hungry etc. Alas, finding a decent notebook with an alternative has been to no avail... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 02:44 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > obstinate refusal to open specs is the short-sightedness and general > ignorance of daycoders and pointy-haired bosses -- all of whom think Java > is the best programming language around because that's what "most" > programmers use and have some vague, unsupported (but stubborn) notion > that secrets are good for business. At least it *seems* they all think > so. > I'm sorry, but the only image I could conjure up for a pointy-haired boss was Bart Simpson in a suit (or Lisa as President) :D Do you have another image in mind? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 5:03 AM, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> >> You remind me of a tech I once worked with who thought all customers >> were stupid. Maybe they were... > > the difference is that FreeBSD is free software. > > or is not? How is that relevant? -- Glen Barber "If you have any trouble sounding condescending, find a Unix user to show you how it's done." --Scott Adams ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 19:15 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > cropping up and saying the equivalent of "If we work on that stuff, > > FreeBSD will just become MS Windows, and it'll suck." I disagree with > because linux got exactly that way and it sucks now. Its better at providing window$ functionality than window$ is and is a lot more stable. If linux can do that, than imagine what well designed software on FreeBSD could do (is doing)? Linux may "suck" (I agree mostly with that sentiment), but it still is a good halfway house for "head stuck in the sand" M$ users looking for a better way of doing things. Then they can graduate to utopia... :) KDE4 at least works better and closer to how it should be on FreeBSD- even if it is "incomplete". ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
You remind me of a tech I once worked with who thought all customers were stupid. Maybe they were... the difference is that FreeBSD is free software. or is not? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 09:32 -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote: > On Mon, Dec 08, 2008 at 08:46:49PM +1000, Da Rock wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 2008-12-07 at 08:29 -0500, Jerry wrote: > > > > > > > IMHO, before FreeBSD can make a significant market share improvement, > > > it has to improve its hardware support. NVidia, for one, has expressed > > > a desire to support FreeBSD; however, it needs the FreeBSD organization > > > to improve its basic product, especially in the 64-bit systems, which > > > are the future of computing. > > > > Ok. So what needs improvement and where to start? Not being critical, > > I'm interested in this. > > > > Personally though, I think the business model here is a failure and > > seriously flawed. And yes, I did study business at Monash (and butted > > heads constantly; IF you don't look out for the health and well being of > > a community, environment, employees, whatever- the extreme social > > responsibility- then the clients and potential clients die, ergo no > > customers therefore no money to be made. Thats looking after your > > bottomline: Duh!) and saw this continually. Marketing the same; > > The thing people seem to forget is that FreeBSD doesn't have a > business model - or that is its business model. It is simply > sharing technology without much concern about propagation or return. > It accepts contributions of various kinds, mostly in kind. > > jerry And that is what makes it so good- because of this business model (or lack thereof) the people involved are doing what they love (at least I would hope so), so like with cooking the secret ingredient to a good product is always love (I hope this doesn't sound too sappy! But it is true, more care is always taken when people actually care about what they do). ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Fri, 2008-12-12 at 22:46 +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > I mean seriously, has this helped anything at all? > > no. all i want is to stop all stupid topics about: > > - KDE/Gnome/other crap (or great things for somebody) > > BECAUSE IT'S NOT PART OF FREEBSD. FreeBSD has nothing to this, except > KDE/Gnome/whatever can be run on it > > - support of flash in Opera/Firefox/Whatever > > again BECAUSE WWW BROWSER ARE NOT PART OF FREEBSD. > > - support of new/hot (literally)/super/extra graphics cards from NVidia. > > BECAUSE Xorg IS NOT PART OF FREEBSD. > > While IMHO full graphics support (graphics support, not GUI) should be > part of kernel as driver, it isn't. > > As NVidia card Xorg module does need some kernel wrapper (no idea why) - > then there is nothing wrong for interested people to write it as ADD > ON/PORT. > > - asking about bloat level, visual apperance comparision etc. between > FreeBSD with KDE and Windoze. > > because KDE ARE NOT PART OF FREEBSD, and FreeBSD on it's own doesn't have > (fortunately) any "desktop environment" so it can't be compared. > > if someone like to compare KDE with windoze - OK but NOT THIS GROUP! > > > > SO - please just stop ALL NTG topics here. this group really lacks > moderator. not someone that will remove posts he considers "lame" but all > that is off topic. > > Off topic=not about FreeBSD OS. Things not run on FreeBSD could (and should) be considered off topic, but if the software is run on FreeBSD (which is an OS, might I remind, not an app) then it does concern FreeBSD- especially if it works elsewhere (in the exact same method- ie kde on linux and freebsd, not necessarily flash). LDAP and NSS is not actually a part of FreeBSD too, neither is postfix, apache, xfce, etc. And yet you have nothing against those. Beware what you advocate... If you take this stance on THIS LIST then you will scare future community members away, and this list will have nothing to talk about (says something about how good FreeBSD itself is). If someone takes a step and asks about FreeBSD from a window$ perspective, M$ is NOT an alternative- obviously they've woken out their dream state to find a nightmare, let them sharpen their claws in linux ok? Then they can come better equiped and have a better understanding of how *nix works- don't shooo them back to the nightmare world of Gates. Commend users for stepping out of a hand fed state- don't snarl at them and tell them they're too stupid. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
> If we want FreeBSD to grow to where vendors pick up obscure and > not-so-obscure > devices and support it more than it is now, we need publicity. If we need > publicity, we need marketing types. If we need marketing types, we need to > pay them, and we need to put up with them, and even be nice to them. I'm not > so sure I want to pay that price. > I don't know that it would NEED marketers, but even so that would be making a deal with the devil- so I agree entirely with that point. However, I do think the problem could be better faced technically than from a business standpoint anyway- style would be a major point here. > As it stands right now, it's a meritocracy -- those with the skills share > their work with others with the skills. It is bound together by the respect > we have for each other, and there's not much name-calling going on. The > product is technically sound, has better hardware support than other *ixes (I > run OpenBSD on servers -- but not on the laptop beause of the lack of laptop > support), and gets the job done well. The documentation is simply phenomenal. > I'm good with that. I'm also more than pleased that there are barriers to > entry based upon a basic unix knowledge level -- I've had one too many > encounters with the unwashed to want to go that direction. Linux developers > spend more time catering to that crowd, and IMO, it suffers for it as much as > it benefits from it. Hence why I tend to send really green unix newbies to linux school than grind their teeth on FreeBSD straight up. Let em get their skills and experience in how *nix in general works on something a little easier (for MIB lovers: noisy cricket), then move up to the big guns. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors
On Sat, 2008-12-13 at 13:05 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 10:46:55AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > >>>I honestly have no idea what you are trying to communicate here. > > >> > > >>exactly what i wrote. the problem is that people like You (and millions > > >>others) are willing to buy product without any documentation. > > > > > >You may find this surprising, but sometimes circumstances lead people to > > >make purchases of "total package" products rather than building something > > > > there are products for them. > > In other words, your answer seems to be: > > "We don't want users who like FreeBSD, but want to use it on a laptop. > FreeBSD should never be used on a laptop." > > I'd say I can safely ignore you, knowing that's your attitude, if it > weren't for the fact that a lot of other people won't know that down the > line, and you may permanently damage the FreeBSD project by chasing off > potential contributors. > > Is there any way I can get you to stop being such a contentious trojan > horse of an enemy to the FreeBSD project? > If one were spiritually minded one might see another reason behind this. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
