Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1998 16:10:49 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Licia <licia@o-o.org>, "Jason C. Wells" <jcwells@u.washington.edu> Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG, not-jordan-hubbard@nowhere Subject: Re: Let's nail some things down. Message-ID: <19981029161049.Q25247@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.981028205707.13136A-100000@o-o>; from Licia on Wed, Oct 28, 1998 at 09:00:15PM -0600 References: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9810281808020.7221-100000@s8-37-26.student.washington.edu> <Pine.BSF.3.96.981028205707.13136A-100000@o-o>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wednesday, 28 October 1998 at 21:00:15 -0600, Licia wrote: > On Wed, 28 Oct 1998, Jason C. Wells wrote: >> On Thu, 29 Oct 1998, Greg Lehey wrote: >>> It's too early to cast them in stone. In addition, we haven't looked >>> at the third category, the "not FreeBSD, but vendor supplies >>> installation aids for FreeBSD users". >> >> If the vendor built binaries for us and provides the install aids,then my >> vote is that that is still "Designed for". >> >> Now that you have mentioned it. Perhaps "Designed for" is a bit >> presumptuous. Any better ideas? >> >> "FreeBSD Native" is good but perhaps nerdy. > > Perhaps to cover all three major cases, there could be three labels? > > FreeBSD Native : runs without emulation > FreeBSD Compatible : runs with emulation, no or trivial effort needed > FreeBSD Adaptible : runs with emulation, non trivial work needed A good start. At least the categories are easy to understand. We need to consider whether the words "native", "compatible" and "adaptable" create the same impression on a potential buyer as they do on us. Any other ideas? Greg -- See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981029161049.Q25247>