Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
(Nevertheless, it is not time to advertise FreeBSD as a "desktop" alternative.)
This is not so much about FreeBSD, as the Unix+X11 combination in general. It does not provide the fully integrated system the typical end-user, coming from a Windows or Mac perspective, expects. That it nevertheless works well enough for persons with a technical or academical background, and those who invest some time, is not questioned. What the Unix+X11 combination in its current blend doesn't provide is the one-size-fits-all solution that Windows and the Mac try to achieve. That's both a good and a bad thing, imho.
There are, of course, situations where Unix is being used as a "desktop" successfully. Think about Unix workstations at universities and larger companies, which have been prevalent for the last 15 years. Or the city administration of Munich, which intends to move its Windows desktops to a Linux/KDE-based installation. What these applications have in common is, that the desktop user is normally different from the person maintaining the installation. This is different from a SOHO setup, where both are normally identical.
mkb. _______________________________________________ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
