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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Am 12.02.2005 um 00:00 schrieb Johnson David:
From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Because FreeBSD is a server, not a desktop.
Agree and disagree. While FreeBSD is well suited for the server, it's
also
well suited for the desktop. That doesn't mean that we should be
stressing
the des
>
> Matthias Buelow writes:
>
> > And your point is..?
>
> I can see that FreeBSD marketing has a long way to go.
To where?FreeBSD is not marketed in any particular way - on purpose.
No one wants to do it, so no one will do it.
jerry
>
> --
> Anthony
>
>
> ___
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
> That depends on the OS to which you compare it. In isolation, FreeBSD
> works on the desktop, just as most UNIX operating systems do, but in
> comparison to Windows or the Mac, it's a rather sorry excuse for a
> desktop. But no OS can do it all, no
On Feb 11, 2005, at 8:49 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
Not in public it doesn't. That is irrelevant to the discussion.
FreeBSD does not work on my PPC HW either.
Score: 12 out of 100. The meeting is over, and a security guard will
show you the door.
Try again.
D
On Sat, 2005-02-12 at 04:34 +0100, Matthias Buelow wrote:
> Robert Marella wrote:
>
> >>MacOS X is the "Desktop BSD". It is available today, and it works
> >>better than anything else at being a "desktop".
> > Does it work on my intel hardware?
>
> And your point is..?
>
> mkb.
Market share
Matthias Buelow writes:
> And your point is..?
I can see that FreeBSD marketing has a long way to go.
--
Anthony
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail
Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC writes:
> Not in public it doesn't. That is irrelevant to the discussion.
> FreeBSD does not work on my PPC HW either.
Score: 12 out of 100. The meeting is over, and a security guard will
show you the door.
Try again.
--
Anthony
_
Robert Marella writes:
> Does it work on my intel hardware?
Two basic responses, one right, one wrong:
Wrong: "Of course it does, you idiot! Don't you know anything about
hardware?"
Right: "FreeBSD easily supports the full range of Intel microprocessors
and virtually all Intel motherboards and
Robert Marella wrote:
MacOS X is the "Desktop BSD". It is available today, and it works
better than anything else at being a "desktop".
Does it work on my intel hardware?
And your point is..?
mkb.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://
On Feb 11, 2005, at 8:32 PM, Robert Marella wrote:
On Sat, 2005-02-12 at 03:14 +0100, Matthias Buelow wrote:
Johnson David wrote:
Currently Windows rules the desktop world, even for diehard Unix
shops. But
that will not last forever. We need to start thinking about the
desktop
today. We need to s
On Sat, 2005-02-12 at 03:14 +0100, Matthias Buelow wrote:
> Johnson David wrote:
>
> > Currently Windows rules the desktop world, even for diehard Unix shops. But
> > that will not last forever. We need to start thinking about the desktop
> > today. We need to stop the official discouragement of d
Matthias Buelow writes:
> MacOS X is the "Desktop BSD". It is available today, and it works
> better than anything else at being a "desktop". Considering the sorry
> state of integrated "desktops" on Unix today (i.e., Gnome and KDE) and
> compare it with Windows, do you really think that will co
Johnson David wrote:
Currently Windows rules the desktop world, even for diehard Unix shops. But
that will not last forever. We need to start thinking about the desktop
today. We need to stop the official discouragement of desktop FreeBSD.
MacOS X is the "Desktop BSD". It is available today, and i
On Feb 11, 2005, at 4:00 PM, Johnson David wrote:
From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Because FreeBSD is a server, not a desktop.
Agree and disagree. While FreeBSD is well suited for the server, it's
also
well suited for the desktop.
Anthony had the same misguided opinion in the Apac
From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Because FreeBSD is a server, not a desktop.
Agree and disagree. While FreeBSD is well suited for the server, it's also
well suited for the desktop. That doesn't mean that we should be stressing
the desktop to those shopping for servers, instead
22 matches
Mail list logo
