From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun May 27 9: 0:21 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from smyk.apk.net (smyk.apk.net [207.54.158.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BBEB837B422 for ; Sun, 27 May 2001 09:00:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ipswitch@kleenex.apk.net) Received: from [192.168.1.60] (stuart.apk.net [207.54.148.235]) by smyk.apk.net (8.11.2/8.11.2/apk.010219+rchk1.22+bspm1.13.1.5a) with ESMTP id f4RG0Bs27506 for ; Sun, 27 May 2001 12:00:12 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 12:00:06 -0400 From: Stuart Krivis Reply-To: Stuart Krivis To: FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: ExBSD Message-ID: <8072844.990964800@[192.168.1.60]> In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20010523093020.017d3fb8@mail.threespace.com> References: <014301c0e249$debd93f0$0300a8c0@oracle> <4.3.2.7.2.20010523093020.017d3fb8@mail.threespace.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.1.0a6 (Mac OS X) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --On Wednesday, May 23, 2001 9:41 AM -0400 Technical Information wrote: > At 07:24 AM 5/23/2001, you wrote: >> I'd say that unix is best used by the "average"' person in an >> environment where there is at least one person who knows unix well. >> >> Hmmm... that's true of Windows and MacOS also. So much for the >> user-friendly approach. > > > Even if this is true, I can probably find a dozen people who know Windows > well before I ran into one person who knew UNIX well. And then I'd have > to ask whether he was using my particular brand of UNIX. Unix is unix. Once someone learns one well, it's quite easy to figure out another one. The vast majority of things will transfer right over. I'm sure I can find a dozen people who "know"' Windows before finding one skilled Unix admin. Unfortunately, it has been my experience that those Windows admins generally can't tell their ass from a hole in the ground. As a Unix admin, I am constantly having to diagnose problems for Windows admins who can't figure it out. Their overall lack of knowledge is frightening. As an example, 99% of the Windows admins I have run across think that pinging a mailserver is the way to tell if it is working or not. They have no idea that you can telnet to port 25 and see what's happening or not happening. You might then reply that they know Exchange and that SMTP, POP, and IMAP are not native to Exchange, so that's why they don't know them. Well, I hear about Exchange a lot too. When it stops working, they call for help. If it's really broken, they just re-install. > > My opinion/experience is that Windows is much easier to use than UNIX for > most desktop tasks, and things like the "Internet Connection Sharing > Wizard" make setting up DHCP servers much easier than editing routing > tables and config files in /etc. I don't think Windows offers as much Most of Windows networking is badly broken. Ease of use? Windows isn't easy to use. What you are seeing is the large number of people who already have some small amount of experience with some flavor of Windows, so they have a head start. > flexibility/power/stability as UNIX, but for lots of common tasks it's > "good enough." I believe that the ease of use factor and the easy to > use, easy on the eyes user interface is one of the big reasons why > Windows will continue to prevail on the desktop. And the application > availability can't be beaten. Good enough? Yes, Windows is quite mediocre, so I guess that fits the definition of "good enough." How about using something that is actually "good," instead of just "good enough?" Easy on the eyes? Yuck. I am not a fan of the Windows look. But that's just m opinion. Do you actually have any proof that Windows is easier to use or easier on the eyes? I didn't think so. Prevailing on the desktop? Most people don't have much choice. They didn't evaluate all the options and decide that Windows is best for them. Application availability? How many spreadsheets do I need? How many of the large number of Windows apps actually differ from each other in significant ways? How many of them are actually any good? How much time is wasted because you must reboot constantly when you're installing or removing a Windows app? It makes evaluating apps a real chore. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sun May 27 16:22:42 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mailtmp6.registeredsite.com (mailtmp6.registeredsite.com [216.247.127.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEAB337B423 for ; Sun, 27 May 2001 16:22:36 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tech_info@threespace.com) Received: from mail5.registeredsite.com (mail5.registeredsite.com [64.224.9.14]) by mailtmp6.registeredsite.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f4RNMr007049 for ; Sun, 27 May 2001 19:22:53 -0400 Received: from mail.threespace.com (mail.threespace.com [216.247.134.44]) by mail5.registeredsite.com (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f4RNMSe19720 for ; Sun, 27 May 2001 19:22:28 -0400 Received: from Atlanta.threespace.com [216.247.134.44] by mail.threespace.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-6.05) id AC301EB200DC; Sun, 27 May 2001 19:22:24 -0400 Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010527183131.017f4858@mail.threespace.com> X-Sender: tech_info@mail.threespace.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3.2 Date: Sun, 27 May 2001 18:51:29 -0400 To: FreeBSD Advocacy From: Technical Information Subject: Re: ExBSD In-Reply-To: <8072844.990964800@[192.168.1.60]> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010523093020.017d3fb8@mail.threespace.com> <014301c0e249$debd93f0$0300a8c0@oracle> <4.3.2.7.2.20010523093020.017d3fb8@mail.threespace.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 12:00 PM 5/27/2001, Stuart Krivis wrote: >Unix is unix. Once someone learns one well, it's quite easy to figure out >another one. The vast majority of things will transfer right over. Heck, I can barely get around the differences in Linux distributions, and they all claim to be the same OS. :-) The differences in UNIX OSes can be large, and any time I've claimed to have some UNIX experience to anybody in a business setting, the question of "Which one?" tends to come up enough to make me think it matters to *somebody*. And try telling that "transfer[s] right over" story to a developer who is spending time compiling and testing on several different versions of UNIX. >I'm sure I can find a dozen people who "know"' Windows before finding one >skilled Unix admin. Unfortunately, it has been my experience that those >Windows admins generally can't tell their ass from a hole in the ground. >As a Unix admin, I am constantly having to diagnose problems for Windows >admins who can't figure it out. Their overall lack of knowledge is frightening. > >As an example, 99% of the Windows admins I have run across think that >pinging a mailserver is the way to tell if it is working or not. They have >no idea that you can telnet to port 25 and see what's happening or not >happening. > >You might then reply that they know Exchange and that SMTP, POP, and IMAP >are not native to Exchange, so that's why they don't know them. Well, I >hear about Exchange a lot too. When it stops working, they call for help. >If it's really broken, they just re-install. > >[snip, snip] Well, without insulting Windows admins around the world, it sounds like the ones that you've dealt with are idiots. And by the same token, you sound like a pretty smart, experienced person. Which is exactly my point--Windows software is watered down to the point that the average schlup can get a few books and a PC and teach himself to be an "expert" in his own spare time. (Which would explain all the philosophy majors turned Windows admins, for instance.) Most decent UNIX users/admins can easily figure their way around Windows (whether they actually like the trip or not). The reverse is usually not true. >Good enough? Yes, Windows is quite mediocre, so I guess that fits the >definition of "good enough." > >How about using something that is actually "good," instead of just "good >enough?" > >Easy on the eyes? Yuck. I am not a fan of the Windows look. But that's >just m opinion. Do you actually have any proof that Windows is easier to >use or easier on the eyes? I didn't think so. > >Prevailing on the desktop? Most people don't have much choice. They didn't >evaluate all the options and decide that Windows is best for them. > >Application availability? How many spreadsheets do I need? How many of the >large number of Windows apps actually differ from each other in >significant ways? How many of them are actually any good? How much time is >wasted because you must reboot constantly when you're installing or >removing a Windows app? It makes evaluating apps a real chore. I remember hearing a materials scientist asking a group of consumers if they would like a light bulb that they'd never have to change in their lifetimes. They were all quite eager until they were told that the bulb would cost over $80. Suddenly their 79 cent bulbs that lasted six months were acceptable to them. By the same token, I like being able to walk into any computer superstore and grab a box off the shelf for about $30-40 that will do what I need. I like being able to choose from competing products. Despite my resignations about Windows itself, some of the apps are pretty darn good, and I wish those guys were developing on UNIX. But in the meantime, an application that does what I need with about 98% reliability (my personal experience with Windows) is just fine. The hunt for UNIX software and the learning curve that follows are often daunting to an average schlup like me. :-) And looks are an issue of personal preference, so I can't argue with you there. But I will say that I like the post-Windows 95 look. And don't even get me started on my opinion font handling (or lack thereof) in the X Window System...ugh. --Chip Morton To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Mon May 28 11:16:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from wilma.widomaker.com (wilma.widomaker.com [204.17.220.5]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DF6D37B424 for ; Mon, 28 May 2001 11:16:26 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from shannon@daydream.shannon.net) Received: from [209.96.179.140] (helo=escape.shannon.net) by wilma.widomaker.com with esmtp (Exim 3.22 #2) id 154RZ1-000CaQ-00; Mon, 28 May 2001 14:16:24 -0400 Received: from daydream (mail@daydream.shannon.net [192.168.1.10]) by escape.shannon.net (8.11.0/8.8.8) with ESMTP id f4SHooI16291; Mon, 28 May 2001 13:50:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from shannon by daydream with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 154RAH-0002wc-00; Mon, 28 May 2001 13:50:49 -0400 Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 13:50:49 -0400 From: Shannon Hendrix To: Stuart Krivis Cc: FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: ExBSD Message-ID: <20010528135047.A10861@widomaker.com> References: <014301c0e249$debd93f0$0300a8c0@oracle> <4.3.2.7.2.20010523093020.017d3fb8@mail.threespace.com> <8072844.990964800@[192.168.1.60]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <8072844.990964800@[192.168.1.60]>; from ipswitch@kleenex.apk.net on Sun, May 27, 2001 at 12:00:06PM -0400 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sun, May 27, 2001 at 12:00:06PM -0400, Stuart Krivis wrote: > Unix is unix. Once someone learns one well, it's quite easy to figure out > another one. The vast majority of things will transfer right over. This is a strength that should be promoted more. > Their overall lack of knowledge is frightening. I was in a movie theater last week and there was an ad up in the previews I didn't really notice at first. But then it dawned on me that it was a Microsoft Certification ad, with a bunch of kids in it saying "I'm going to be certified when I grow up!" Made me feel a little sick, and it was kind of Orwellian. Nothing like targeting the youth in the theaters. > If it's really broken, they just re-install. Sadly, a lot of UNIX people do this too. Their training is often suspect, and I always worry about a UNIX admin who never touches anything but Windows outside of his immediate responsibility. I've seen a lot of people actually reboot E-class Sun systems because Oracle was performing badly, and similar nonsense. One thing good I have noticed though, is that a lot of people using BSD or Linux at home extensively, are often better admins even on other UNIX than many who have been to expensive training programs. They tend to be more willing and able to do the research needed to learn new things and get a grip on variations in UNIX systems. > Easy on the eyes? Yuck. I am not a fan of the Windows look. But that's just > m opinion. Do you actually have any proof that Windows is easier to use or > easier on the eyes? I didn't think so. Most people when asked to look at a variety of GUI systems, do not choose Windows. The last such test I saw showed NeXT and Apple pretty much at the top, and interestingly, some systems like CDE scored higher than Windows. It was especially telling when the participants had no computer experience at all. Even Windows users often pick other systems, and some of them are amazed at the other GUI systems, having been unaware of their existence before. > Application availability? How many spreadsheets do I need? How many of the [snip] I think the problem here isn't the number, but the fact that the average Joe cannot go to CompUSA and find what they want. While you might convince people that they don't need that plethora of Windows crud, they can still point to some very real needs that are not addressed in the UNIX world. Of course, there are also some real gems in the UNIX world for free, like Blender (3D modeling/animation) and The Gimp (2D paint and manipulation). What I hate is that most software is written to be Windows only. Lot's of companies have demonstrated that it isn't that much harder to make them portable, including a large number of games (typically very difficult to make portable). In fact, it's probably harder to make a program portable if written on a UNIX system, because you cannot depend on Windows to be equally capable. > How many of them are actually any good? How much time is wasted > because you must reboot constantly when you're installing or removing > a Windows app? It makes evaluating apps a real chore. They don't evaulate at all, they just use what their system came with, and most of the time it's Office. Also, don't underestimate a Windows user's immense patience. I've seen cube-farms of Windows people reboot incessantly while working on spreadsheets and Windows programming. It's amazing they get anything done at all, and I submit that often they don't. When I worked for a certain very large bank, I know with certainty that Windows snafus cost the bank millions of dollars, sometimes maybe that much in a single quarter, and a single project. It wasn't uncommon for me to take a Solaris/FreeBSD/Linux machine and do in hours what took some of the Windows people weeks to do, and my results were correct. But if you ever talked about replacing analysts with Windows machines and using some simple shell and Perl scripts instead, the response was basically "You must be kidding. We cannot trust our data to some hacked up scripts, we need professionally developed software." -- "I wish life was not so short. Languages take such a time, and so do all the things one wants to know about." - J. R. R. Tolkien ______________________________________________________________________ Charles Shannon Hendrix s h a n n o n @ w i d o m a k e r . c o m To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue May 29 10:34:40 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D266D37B422 for ; Tue, 29 May 2001 10:34:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.47.12]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA6AA9; Tue, 29 May 2001 10:40:34 -0700 Message-ID: <3B13DDA6.70944DCD@acuson.com> Date: Tue, 29 May 2001 10:34:30 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stuart Krivis Cc: FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: ExBSD References: <014301c0e249$debd93f0$0300a8c0@oracle> <4.3.2.7.2.20010523093020.017d3fb8@mail.threespace.com> <8072844.990964800@[192.168.1.60]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Stuart Krivis wrote: > Good enough? Yes, Windows is quite mediocre, so I guess that fits the > definition of "good enough." I remember an article written by an OS/2 ISV that argued that Windows was successful because it was merely "good enough", and that no matter how technically excellent OS/2 was, it could not compete against Windows because most people only want "good enough". > Prevailing on the desktop? Most people don't have much choice. They didn't > evaluate all the options and decide that Windows is best for them. Oh, they have the choice all right. They merely choose not to excercise it. Choosing FreeBSD (or Linux, BeOS, etc) is a more difficult decision than to just take what's already installed. Why should they make an effort to learn Unix, check for hardware compatibility, and be the odd man out on their block, when Windows is already "good enough"? We're all using FreeBSD (or some other Unix) because we will not settle for "good enough". David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed May 30 2:17: 5 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mailbox.univie.ac.at (mailbox.univie.ac.at [131.130.1.27]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06FCC37B43E for ; Wed, 30 May 2001 02:17:02 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from l.ertl@univie.ac.at) Received: from pcle2.cc.univie.ac.at (pcle2.cc.univie.ac.at [131.130.2.177]) by mailbox.univie.ac.at (8.11.2/8.11.2) with ESMTP id f4U9GsF103132 for ; Wed, 30 May 2001 11:16:54 +0200 Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 11:16:53 +0200 (CEST) From: Lukas Ertl X-X-Sender: To: Subject: IPF License Issues Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi, seems like Mr. de Raadt has removed the ipf source from the OpenBSD repository: , as a reaction on the ipf license change. How will that license change affect FreeBSD? Will ipf be removed from the FreeBSD source as well? regards, le --=20 Lukas Ertl eMail: l.ertl@univie.ac.at WWW-Redaktion Tel.: (+43 1) 4277-14073 Zentraler Informatikdienst (ZID) Fax.: (+43 1) 4277-9140 der Universit=E4t Wien To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed May 30 3:43:18 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from hall.mail.mindspring.net (hall.mail.mindspring.net [207.69.200.60]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6D5D37B422 for ; Wed, 30 May 2001 03:43:13 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from tlambert2@mindspring.com) Received: from mindspring.com (dialup-209.245.139.3.Dial1.SanJose1.Level3.net [209.245.139.3]) by hall.mail.mindspring.net (8.9.3/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA20949; Wed, 30 May 2001 06:43:10 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3B14CED8.3CE0D7FB@mindspring.com> Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 03:43:36 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Reply-To: tlambert2@mindspring.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Stuart Krivis Cc: FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: ExBSD References: <014301c0e249$debd93f0$0300a8c0@oracle> <4.3.2.7.2.20010523093020.017d3fb8@mail.threespace.com> <8072844.990964800@[192.168.1.60]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Stuart Krivis wrote: > > My opinion/experience is that Windows is much easier to > > use than UNIX for most desktop tasks, and things like > > the "Internet Connection Sharing Wizard" make setting > > up DHCP servers much easier than editing routing tables > > and config files in /etc. I don't think Windows offers > > as much > > Most of Windows networking is badly broken. > > Ease of use? Windows isn't easy to use. What you are > seeing is the large number of people who already have > some small amount of experience with some flavor of > Windows, so they have a head start. FWIW, and not to defend it unduly, but he has a point. The primary business expense with desktop systems is that the initial training costs are around $2,500 per seat (1999 figures from HCI studies). The thing that makes Widows valuable is that it has a common look and feel -- so the time you spent learning to run one control panel applet is immediately applicable and transferrable over to the other control panel applets and the training you spent learning Word transfers over to Excel and other applications. And this is why the training per seat is "only" $2,500. Comparatively, UNIX is a real mess, even if every application you use is a Motif application, and every programmer religiously followed the Motif Style Guide, there is still a lot of room for variance, where the user experience for Windows is significantly more controlled. Even in the face of "desktop themes" (the worst idea, from a support perspective, ever to make it into release, with DHCP following a real close second), Windows is more usable for the average user. To top everything off... employers don't have to pay the $2,500 per seat training fee, since any temporary worker they hire from any agency will have some kind of Windows training, if they are able to operate a computer at all. Maybe it not "fair" that Windows has this advantage: but there is an easy answer: enforce the Windows Style Guide, and the use of particular windows managers (e.g. fvwm95, as an obvious choice) and particular widget sets in new UNIX programs. Doing that would mean that all that prepaid training would be immediately transferrable to UNIX, as well. > Do you actually have any proof that Windows is easier to > use or easier on the eyes? I didn't think so. It's certainly easier for the average user to use a new and unfamiliar program the first time. It's called a shallow learning curve. Whether you personally value that or not, employers do, and employers pay the bills; UNIX will _never_ make significant inroads into the office desktop market until it addresses the training and learning curve cost issues. > Prevailing on the desktop? Most people don't have much > choice. They didn't evaluate all the options and decide > that Windows is best for them. Actually, they did. They just used the yardstick of cost. > Application availability? How many spreadsheets do I need? Only one: the one your temp agency person knows how to run. > How many of the large number of Windows apps actually > differ from each other in significant ways? That's a benefit, not a negative. It means zero training costs. > How much time is wasted because you must reboot constantly > when you're installing or removing a Windows app? That's what IT people are for, and you only need one or two of them. You can get by on one part time person, if you agree to standardize everything for all your employees so that the IT person doesn't have to deal with oddball configurations. > It makes evaluating apps a real chore. That's what IT people are for: to have evaluated these things on their last jobs, so you can just pay them to tell you the answers they know. You are paying for what is stored between their ears. And Windows is getting better, slowly. Microsoft wrote the RFC on IPv4 stateless autoconfiguration. It's almost to the peoint where you can plug your network together and have everything "just work"; SLPv2 will take care of that, and if the Microsoft "standard" wins, then UPnP will do it instead. The progress just seems glacial when compared to having the source code available for hacking to fix something you find annoying, but which no one else could care less about. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed May 30 11: 5:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from odin.acuson.com (odin.acuson.com [157.226.230.71]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4F8E37B424 for ; Wed, 30 May 2001 11:05:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from djohnson@acuson.com) Received: from acuson.com ([157.226.47.12]) by odin.acuson.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.54) with ESMTP id AAA4481; Wed, 30 May 2001 11:11:19 -0700 Message-ID: <3B15365E.7140D076@acuson.com> Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 11:05:18 -0700 From: David Johnson Organization: Acuson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: tlambert2@mindspring.com Cc: FreeBSD Advocacy Subject: Re: ExBSD References: <014301c0e249$debd93f0$0300a8c0@oracle> <4.3.2.7.2.20010523093020.017d3fb8@mail.threespace.com> <8072844.990964800@[192.168.1.60]> <3B14CED8.3CE0D7FB@mindspring.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Terry Lambert wrote: > Maybe it not "fair" that Windows has this advantage: but > there is an easy answer: enforce the Windows Style Guide, > and the use of particular windows managers (e.g. fvwm95, > as an obvious choice) and particular widget sets in new > UNIX programs. Doing that would mean that all that > prepaid training would be immediately transferrable to > UNIX, as well. That's half the point of the desktop environments. CDE then KDE then GNOME (not to slight any that I failed to mention). Running tcl/tk apps next to a KDE app next to a Xt app with custom widgets doesn't bother me at all. But it does bother a lot of people. Even an app with a different color scheme can confuse some people. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed May 30 12: 1:51 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (adsl-63-207-60-66.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [63.207.60.66]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 242BB37B496 for ; Wed, 30 May 2001 12:01:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B1C70671A4; Wed, 30 May 2001 12:01:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 12:01:43 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Lukas Ertl Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IPF License Issues Message-ID: <20010530120143.B69084@xor.obsecurity.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-md5; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="U+BazGySraz5kW0T" Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from l.ertl@univie.ac.at on Wed, May 30, 2001 at 11:16:53AM +0200 Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --U+BazGySraz5kW0T Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, May 30, 2001 at 11:16:53AM +0200, Lukas Ertl wrote: > Hi, >=20 > seems like Mr. de Raadt has removed the ipf source from the OpenBSD > repository: , > as a reaction on the ipf license change. >=20 > How will that license change affect FreeBSD? Will ipf be removed from the > FreeBSD source as well? Core is discussing it with Darren. Presumably no knee-jerk reactions will be made. Kris --U+BazGySraz5kW0T Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE7FUOWWry0BWjoQKURAnhLAKC3pA+yKhawxrft99sJIfNAvUutqACePxrH lXSmO7JnFMKz2ALKujzV2X4= =KPil -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --U+BazGySraz5kW0T-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message