Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2001 20:00:55 -0500 From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: Duke Normandin <01031149@3web.net> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: BSDi Acquired by Embedded Computing Firm Wind River Message-ID: <15057.2503.733466.239418@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <94484660@toto.iv>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Duke Normandin <01031149@3web.net> types: > On Sat, Apr 07, 2001 at 10:49:43PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: I know I'm butting into a two-person conversation - but you're doing it in a public forum, so I'm empowered :-). > So...is it fair to say that given the multitude of junk hardware in > active use, that M$ and perhaps Linux have done an outstanding job in > 1. writing relatively stable drivers for this so-called crap, and 2., > dove-tailing same with their perhaps not-so-stable kernel(s)? As well, > that this whole discussion is really about quality and availablity of > junk-hardware drivers? Linux has done an outstanding job writing relatively stable drivers. MS has done an outstanding job in getting hardware manufacturers to support their operating systems. > > cheaper OS's as well, I know of at least 1 Compaq model that a customer > > has which runs NT Workstation flawlessly, but crashed regularly under > > Windows 95. > True enough! However, in your vast experience, what percentage of the > current and future Unix users do you suppose can afford the quality of > basic and peripheral hardware that commercial houses opt for -- and more > importantly, that the FreeBSD top-level folks *seem* to have deemed to be > the only type that drivers would be written for? You're confusing "won't work on junk that doesn't follow spec" with "won't work on inexpensive hardware". It's perfectly possible to buy an inexpensive system and have FreeBSD run quite reliably on it. Possibly not as reliably as on quality hardware, but at least as reliably as either Windows or Linux on that same hardware. > Your comments above, IMHO, support your previous suggestion that this > whole issue revolves around certain strategic marketing decisions that > have been made. Something to the effect that -- we'll aim at being the > best server platform possible, and to hell with catering to the desktop > users with their paeon junk hardware. If they're clued-in enough to get > with the program and come up to standards, then it'll work for them, up > to a point. Otherwise, piss on em! Am I being unfair? I'd say your stretching the point. Some of the developers do try and work around substandard hardware. However, it's not a priority, especialy if they have to do it without being able to put their hands on the hardware. > > If you are willing to use FreeBSD as a desktop OS - which means giving up > > the ability to run certain windows applications - then you will probably > > have no problems with it. Now, if you were a programmmer and you "forced" > > FreeBSD into running _all_ Windows applications, well then you might have to > > make serious compromises in system integrity to do it. > Would Netscape be a good example of the above? I take it that you are > suggesting that FreeBSD ports of some Windows programs are poorly done > *and* that the peripheral hardware that some of these use/require lead to > system performance degradation due to FreeBSD's poor junk-hardware > support? I think you just tried to tie to many things together, because I can't parse that. Want to rephrase that - possibly into multiple questions? > Sure...Like you said marketing; marketing, marketing! Those Linux folks > aren't stupid either I suppose. I'm sure that they also recognize the > preponderance of the junk hardware that's being used both in private and > corporate settings - globally. So it's my guess that they are trying to > make the best out of a not-so-good fact of life, by writing the best > drivers possible for as much junk as possible -- in order to win over as > many new converts as possible, to the "Unix way". Isn't *that* what it > should be about -- at least to some degree? That depneds on whether you're trying to win a popularity contest, or have the best tools you can get. If you're trying to win a popularity contest, you should have chosen the most popular acceptable alternative to start with. Once you've got that, do you really want to make it less acceptable in order to gain popularity? <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15057.2503.733466.239418>