Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 17, 2005, at 5:33 PM, Chris Zumbrunn wrote: On Feb 17, 2005, at 11:38 AM, Sander Vesik wrote: as a side note - whats teh licence / use policy of your designs you have been posting links to on FreeBSD related materials? As far as I'm concerned, "the Beastie silhouette" can be used as long as

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 17, 2005, at 11:38 AM, Sander Vesik wrote: On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:53:50 +0100, Chris Zumbrunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Don't you think this Beastie qualifies as a professional logo? http://top.ch/sitedata/freebsd/beastie.gif as a side note - whats teh licence / use policy of your designs

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:53:50 +0100, Chris Zumbrunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Don't you think this Beastie qualifies as a professional logo? > > http://top.ch/sitedata/freebsd/beastie.gif > as a side note - whats teh licence / use policy of your designs you have been posting links to on

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Monday 14 February 2005 05:34 pm, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Vonleigh Simmons writes: > > If you need to run explorer to access a website, someone should be > > fired. Standards compliance is a good thing. > > MSIE has traditionally followed HTML standards more closely than

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > I initially ran a pirated copy of DOS on it (remember, at that time > MS wasn't selling DOS retail) but shortly after I got it up I switched > over to...drumroll > > Minix. Ah, but anything even remotely similar to UNIX would have been superior to MS-DOS, so that move w

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > Many wordprocessors write in Microsoft Word format these days. Currently I use Quark XPress instead of Word, as Word is too bloated and too uncontrollable, and does not produce output suitable for professional printing. > That is what AW used to layout my book, as a ma

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Tue, 2005-02-15 at 17:58 +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote: [snip] Please copy this down and put it on a sticky note on your monitor: PLEASE SHUT UP ANTHONY. Do you find it strange that you get so much flack in pseudo-technical discussions? Your understanding of the technology and the issues

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > In short, there's no way to know how an incorrectly written > HTML page will display on IE. The solution is to not write HTML incorrectly. That's what HTML validators are for. No browser has any obligation to behave in any particular predetermined way in the face of b

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

no they did and could point out specific problems and likely intentional changes. Where can I see a list of these? Here are just a few: A very basic one is the box model problem. Basically if you define the width of a box to be 100 pixels,

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Monday 14 February 2005 09:32 pm, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: > > You can say all you want. > > Thank you. I feel better about it knowing that it's okay with you. > > > Every professional designer I have ever talked with lamented the > > p

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

MSIE has traditionally followed HTML standards more closely than almost any other browser. Firefox does pretty well, tough; Opera much less so. You are _definitely_ not a web designer. MSIE is _hell_ with standards compliance. Mozilla is the best, followed by Opera, KHTML/Safari is also up the

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony > Atkielski > Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 3:11 PM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > Ted Mittelstaedt wr

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony > Atkielski > Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 3:07 PM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > > Yes, and

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony > Atkielski > Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 5:49 PM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > Chad Leigh -- Shire

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Erik Steffl > Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 10:54 AM > To: freebsd-questions > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > ...

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 14, 2005, at 11:11 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: no they did and could point out specific problems and likely intentional changes. Where can I see a list of these? This page points to

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: > no they did and could point out specific problems and likely > intentional changes. Where can I see a list of these? > Google on this issue of Windows IE standard compliance, especially with > CSS. You will find reams of info with examples of where MS got i

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 14, 2005, at 10:32 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: You can say all you want. Thank you. I feel better about it knowing that it's okay with you. Every professional designer I have ever talked with lamented the poor state of standards conformance of IE for Win

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: > You can say all you want. Thank you. I feel better about it knowing that it's okay with you. > Every professional designer I have ever talked with lamented the poor > state of standards conformance of IE for Windows. They probably never actually tested the

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 14, 2005, at 6:48 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: That is laughable. MS IE on Windows has one of the worst reputations around for following web standards. Go ask any professional designer. I did better. I actually ran the W3C conformance tests against MSIE

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: > That is laughable. MS IE on Windows has one of the worst reputations > around for following web standards. Go ask any professional designer. I did better. I actually ran the W3C conformance tests against MSIE, and it passed. At the time, no other browser

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 14, 2005, at 6:34 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Vonleigh Simmons writes: If you need to run explorer to access a website, someone should be fired. Standards compliance is a good thing. MSIE has traditionally followed HTML standards more closely than almost any other browser. Firefox does pre

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Vonleigh Simmons writes: > If you need to run explorer to access a website, someone should be > fired. Standards compliance is a good thing. MSIE has traditionally followed HTML standards more closely than almost any other browser. Firefox does pretty well, tough; Opera much less so. Webmasters

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Flight Simulator I missed this. If you want a game, use that. But if you want a real flight simulator check out x-plane: Microsoft Internet Explorer If you need to run explorer to access a website, someone should be fired. Standards compliance is a good thing. Vonle

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > Like Anthony, I do use Windows on the desktop myself. Well, that says it all, doesn't it? > But not exclusively. If you had only one computer that could boot only one OS, which would it be? > And, much more importantly, I will readily admit that I haven't > switched

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > WRONG, the specific purpose is what's important, not the tool to > accomplish it. Sometimes the tool is part of the purpose, if you must be able to share data with other people or organizations. For example, if you have a client or supplier who requires AutoCAD or Phot

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: ... of laziness. In my case I unfortunately decided it might be a good thing to use a Microsoft client mail program to handle e-mail. This was a decade ago. I now have around ten thousand archived e-mail messages accumulated in a massive *.pst file that I really want to k

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Giorgos Keramidas writes: > Hmmm, how? There are several ways. I'll leave speculation on that as an exercise for the reader. > Very little can be said about a black box system. It's not a black box. Much of it is pretty well documented, although some of the documentation is now out of print,

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Dick > Hoogendijk > Sent: Monday, February 14, 2005 3:11 AM > To: freebsd-questions > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > On 14 Feb Ted Mittelstaedt wrot

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On 14 Feb Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony > > Atkielski Just curious. Why do you keep replying Anthony in such a professional way if all he does is promoting windows again and again. He uses wi

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony > Atkielski > Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 12:22 PM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > In any case, i

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On 2005-02-12 14:03, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Ted Mittelstaedt writes: >> How exactly does one do this when the NT kernel code isn't available >> for perusal? > > One gains access to the kernel code. Hmmm, how? > However, just observing the systems and studying their design t

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Simon Burke writes: > I use photshop on IRIX i mean, and you can use gimp too, is what i meant. According to Adobe, Photoshop exists only for the Mac and Windows. Of course, Mac OS X is based on UNIX, but since it has a proprietary GUI, I don't think that would help much (?). GIMP is not an opt

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:59:29 +0100, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Simon Burke writes: > > > Use on my SGI workstaion (IRIX), GIMP > > I said Photoshop, not GIMP. I use photshop on IRIX i mean, and you can use gimp too, is what i meant. > > I don't want equivalents, I want the sa

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Simon Burke writes: > Use on my SGI workstaion (IRIX), GIMP I said Photoshop, not GIMP. I don't want equivalents, I want the same applications. I can get Photoshop on the Mac, so moving to a Mac would not present a problem for Photoshop (although it would for most of my other applications). >

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:30:45 +0100, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michael C. Shultz writes: > > > I Agree! My FreeBSD desktop is very stable and user friendly. What > > ever time I spend fixing/managing desktops is on my friends windows > > machines, never my own because it alway

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: > In that case, Windows is the least desirable, as it is not convenient. There are a hundred million users out there who disagree. > The amount of crap you have to put up with (viruses, malware, etc) > makes them totally inconvenient. See above. > Sure it d

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: > ? What the heck does this mean? It means that large organizations want to have a single official release of the OS running on all servers, and they expect that release to come formally from a specific official source. Hacking changes into the code and t

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 13, 2005, at 1:00 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: I can't think of any time that MS is the best choice, except in perhaps some vertical market cases. It is often the most convenient choice. Convenience is reason enough by itself to choose a particular OS.

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 13, 2005, at 12:57 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: Maybe companies who support MS or other proprietary software can't as they don't have the source. But support companies that support open source can very easily fix problems -- they have the source and the l

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: > I can't think of any time that MS is the best choice, except in perhaps > some vertical market cases. It is often the most convenient choice. Convenience is reason enough by itself to choose a particular OS. The only people who deliberately choose inconveni

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: > Maybe companies who support MS or other proprietary software > can't as they don't have the source. But support companies that > support open source can very easily fix problems -- they have the > source and the license to use it Unfortunately, their fix m

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... A request to the moderators...

Chris writes: > I respectfully ask the moderator of the list to kill these threads. > People keep feeding this animal, and the animal remains. By the way, which thread are you replying to again? Threads live when people participate in them. It takes at least two people to maintain a thread. Th

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 6:56 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Bart Silverstrim writes: Every $ spent on a product is another $ supporting it. Incidentally true, but not always the objective. Rarely. Frequently. Many software choices and upgrade decisions today are driven primarily or solely by a need to b

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 6:53 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Paul Mather writes: I hate to burst your bubble, but neither is any other OS vendor ultimately accountable for its code. Actually it is. That's why companies tend to prefer support from vendors; vendors have a vested interest in making good on

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Bart Silverstrim writes: > Every $ spent on a product is another $ supporting it. Incidentally true, but not always the objective. > Rarely. Frequently. Many software choices and upgrade decisions today are driven primarily or solely by a need to become or remain compatible with other business

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Paul Mather writes: > I hate to burst your bubble, but neither is any other OS vendor > ultimately accountable for its code. Actually it is. That's why companies tend to prefer support from vendors; vendors have a vested interest in making good on support requests, because they can lose a lot mo

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 4:20 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Bart Silverstrim writes: Thank you for supporting vendor lock-in. Recognizing, not supporting. Every $ spent on a product is another $ supporting it. Do don't even bother asking people who will suggest alternatives, because it's not what you wan

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 21:25:36 +0100, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul Mather writes: > > > As I said, that's why you'd contract with one of those outfits in > the > > "Vendors" section. > > If they can do the job. Since they didn't write the code, though, they > aren't ultimat

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chris Zumbrunn wrote [02/12/05 1:53 PM]: Don't you think this Beastie qualifies as a professional logo? http://top.ch/sitedata/freebsd/beastie.gif He's certainly austere enough with that Roman nose. "Gravitas." -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ fr

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Bart Silverstrim writes: > Thank you for supporting vendor lock-in. Recognizing, not supporting. > At any rate, what you're essentially saying is that you want to run a > particular application so no matter what happens this is what you must > have and use. Yes. > Do don't even bother asking p

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Bart Silverstrim writes: > Um...methinks he was referring to finding your IP to crack your system > since you just announced you don't update it... I've made a note of his premeditation. However, the system in question is not accessible from the Net. -- Anthony __

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chris Zumbrunn wrote: On Feb 12, 2005, at 9:11 PM, Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg wrote: Maybe just the FreeBSD part and a couple of stylized horns over it, but that would mean Beastie would not be clearly visible and I dont know if I dare to suggest that. ;) I agree something like this... http://top.

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 4:05 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Bart Silverstrim writes: I never quite liked these arguments. The question to ask is, "What can I use for graphics editing on platform X? What can I use for desktop publishing on platform Y?". Not in this case, because many of these applicati

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 2:00 PM, Chris Zumbrunn wrote: On Feb 12, 2005, at 9:11 PM, Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg wrote: Chris Zumbrunn wrote: [snip] http://top.ch/sitedata/freebsd/beastie.gif [snip] Maybe just the FreeBSD part and a couple of stylized horns over it, but that would mean Beastie would not b

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 4:01 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Vonleigh Simmons writes: Rat Bastards at FreeBSD that don't break into the companies, steal the code, and port their apps. I don't understand this comment. I can go months without rebooting. My NT machine has gone for nearly a year without a r

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Bart Silverstrim writes: > I never quite liked these arguments. The question to ask is, "What can > I use for graphics editing on platform X? What can I use for desktop > publishing on platform Y?". Not in this case, because many of these applications must produce files that I can share with o

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Vonleigh Simmons writes: > Rat Bastards at FreeBSD that don't break into the companies, steal the > code, and port their apps. I don't understand this comment. >> I can go months without rebooting. My NT machine has gone for nearly a >> year without a reboot. > > *looks up your IP* My

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 9:11 PM, Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg wrote: Chris Zumbrunn wrote: [snip] http://top.ch/sitedata/freebsd/beastie.gif [snip] Maybe just the FreeBSD part and a couple of stylized horns over it, but that would mean Beastie would not be clearly visible and I dont know if I dare to sug

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Joshua Tinnin writes: > Maybe you should write to the developer of Agent and inquire about this > issue. What issue? -- Anthony ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes: > After taking out all the kernel level stuff for the GUI and other > performance enhancements that MS has made for the gamers and other > people, I would say that it is probably true that the NT kernel and the > BSD kernels are in the same order of magnitude

Re: SPAM: Score 3.3: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Jerry McAllister wrote: Matthias Buelow writes: And your point is..? I can see that FreeBSD marketing has a long way to go. To where?FreeBSD is not marketed in any particular way - on purpose. No one wants to do it, so no one will do it. jerry I want to, and frequently do, market FreeB

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 5:30 AM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: Michael C. Shultz writes: I Agree! My FreeBSD desktop is very stable and user friendly. What ever time I spend fixing/managing desktops is on my friends windows machines, never my own because it always just works. Maybe you can explain to me ho

Re: SPAM: Score 3.3: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Kevin Kinsey writes: > I'm guessing *you* are atypical in this. I know that I am not. About 95% of all problems with Windows machines are experienced by about 5% of the user base. The rest of the world has no problems. > Most of our Windows boxes are rather stable. But our FreeBSD ones are > s

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

I have to run these applications for work and play. I therefore cannot use any operating system that doesn't support them on the desktop. Rat Bastards at FreeBSD that don't break into the companies, steal the code, and port their apps. I never allow anything on my machines to be automatically

Re: SPAM: Score 3.3: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Matthias Buelow writes: > Well, if you just run a set of 1-3 applications, and don't do anything > else with the computer, there shouldn't be much of a difference. True, if those applications run identically on both platforms. > Apart from making a political statement, the advantage is > of cour

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Paul Mather writes: > As I said, that's why you'd contract with one of those outfits in the > "Vendors" section. If they can do the job. Since they didn't write the code, though, they aren't ultimately accountable for it. > BTW, it is usually not realistic to expect an organisation to have "all

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Saturday 12 February 2005 03:23 am, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > > You got to be kidding - you actually prefer this over trn? ;-) > > I've never used trn. Forte Agent works fine for me. I originally > used Outlook Express but I couldn't put custom

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 5:59 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: The stabilities of NT-based systems and UNIX are roughly the same when kernels are compared. How exactly does one do this when the NT kernel code isn't available for perusal? Other than, of course, just running both and assuming that because neit

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chris Zumbrunn wrote: [snip] Don't you think this Beastie qualifies as a professional logo? http://top.ch/sitedata/freebsd/beastie.gif Its a major step in the right direction. Personally, I dont really like it, but if it was to be the new logo I would not complain. It would solve most of the print

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... However, everytime I've tried to suggest even the slightest change to freebsd.org, people has started to kick and scream and preach about the end of the OS as we know it. I have never kicked and screamed abo

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 9:26 AM To: Chris Zumbrunn Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.co

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Roger 'Rocky' > Vetterberg > Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 9:26 AM > To: Chris Zumbrunn > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: R

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 6:26 PM, Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg wrote: I advocate changes, you disagree with me, and then you list a lot of points that should be changed? Im having difficulties with your logic here. :) I'm not against the changes, of course. I'm not "against" a separate freebsd.com site e

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Chris Zumbrunn wrote: On Feb 12, 2005, at 4:59 PM, Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg wrote: So far, I have not seen one single valid argument against a freebsd.com website or a new logo, so I side with the people that wants some changes to happen in this one. Well, if you put it that bluntly, let me disa

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Feb 12, 2005, at 4:59 PM, Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg wrote: So far, I have not seen one single valid argument against a freebsd.com website or a new logo, so I side with the people that wants some changes to happen in this one. Well, if you put it that bluntly, let me disagree with you :-) If yo

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> So far, I have not seen one single valid argument > against a > freebsd.com website or a new logo, so I side with > the people that > wants some changes to happen in this one. > I'm with Roger here. It is time for a change, and perhaps a smaller, but "business friendly" image on the MAIN si

Re: SPAM: Score 3.3: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Anthony Atkielski wrote: Jeremy C. Reed writes: Being able to run a desktop for over a hundred days without reboots, without annoying continuous software failures, without worry of malicious (or anoying) pop-ups, virus, and malware, and being able to quickly do my desktop work is a good reason t

Re: SPAM: Score 3.3: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Anthony Atkielski wrote: Or the city administration of Munich, which intends to move its Windows desktops to a Linux/KDE-based installation. Why not just burn taxpayer euro in a bonfire? It would have the same end result and it would be faster. Well, if you just run a set of 1-3 applications, and

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Anthony Atkielski wrote: Scott I. Remick writes: A better realworld example (which has been mentioned before) is www.sendmail.org vs. www.sendmail.com. I think that better reflects what people are suggesting for www.freebsd.com. Agreed! Although both sites actually aim at similar markets, since

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Sat, 12 Feb 2005 11:01:27 +0100, Anthony Atkielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul Mather writes: > > > The operating system is one thing; a certain level support is > another. > > That's Free/Open Source software for you. > > Yes. And it's one of the factors that makes the open-source mov

Re: SPAM: Score 3.3: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Matthias Buelow writes: > This is not so much about FreeBSD, as the Unix+X11 combination in > general. It does not provide the fully integrated system the typical > end-user, coming from a Windows or Mac perspective, expects. That it > nevertheless works well enough for persons with a technica

Re: SPAM: Score 3.3: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

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

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Saturday 12 February 2005 04:19 am, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Michael C. Shultz writes: > > That was obvious by your confusion with Firefox an opera for > > example. > > What confusion? > > Firefox exists only for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux. I politely cautioned you over the wisdom of remain

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > How exactly does one do this when the NT kernel code isn't available > for perusal? One gains access to the kernel code. However, just observing the systems and studying their design tells a lot as well. The NT kernel is very well designed. -- Anthony

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony > Atkielski > Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 4:25 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > The stabilitie

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > Well now Michael, maybe his experience is only with NT 3.51 - that was > pretty stable before Microsoft put the GUI into ring 0 to make all the > gamers happy (in NT4) Later versions of NT and its successors are also extremely stable, although you're correct in that NT

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Michael C. Shultz writes: > That was obvious by your confusion with Firefox an opera for example. What confusion? Firefox exists only for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux. All of these require a GUI to work. I don't run a GUI on my FreeBSD machine. The only browser I have installed on FreeBSD is

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Michael C. > Shultz > Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 4:03 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > > > > I

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Saturday 12 February 2005 03:44 am, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Michael C. > > Shultz > > Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 3:18 AM > > To: freebsd-questions@fre

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > That is really stupid since there's been many security patches that have > come out in the last year that require rebooting during their install. My NT machine does not require them. > If your NT system touches a network that touches the Internet, it needs > to be patc

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Saturday 12 February 2005 03:41 am, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Michael C. Shultz writes: > > What about the other 12000 ports? How do they do in windows? > > I don't know, since I don't need or use them. That was obvious by your confusion with Firefox an opera for example. You admit you don't

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony > Atkielski > Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 3:42 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > I can go mo

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Michael C. > Shultz > Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 3:18 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > What about

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Michael C. Shultz writes: > What about the other 12000 ports? How do they do in windows? I don't know, since I don't need or use them. > Likely there is a *FREE* port for most of what you listed above. No, there isn't. These software products run only on Windows, generally speaking. A few ex

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > You got to be kidding - you actually prefer this over trn? ;-) I've never used trn. Forte Agent works fine for me. I originally used Outlook Express but I couldn't put custom quote headers into it, and so I switched. Ultimately Agent turned out to be very superior t

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

On Saturday 12 February 2005 02:30 am, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Michael C. Shultz writes: > > I Agree! My FreeBSD desktop is very stable and user friendly. What > > ever time I spend fixing/managing desktops is on my friends windows > > machines, never my own because it always just works. > > Ma

RE: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Anthony > Atkielski > Sent: Saturday, February 12, 2005 2:31 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... > > > Michael C. Shul

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Michael C. Shultz writes: > I Agree! My FreeBSD desktop is very stable and user friendly. What > ever time I spend fixing/managing desktops is on my friends windows > machines, never my own because it always just works. Maybe you can explain to me how to get the following applications to run on

Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Sander Vesik writes: > This is BULLSHIT. Not just any any bullshit either but virulent stinky > bullshit - and also coincidentially the best way to dispromote > FreeBSD. You need to support your position with reasoned arguments, otherwise it will not persuade. That's what I do. -- Anthony __

  1   2   >