Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 21:51:32 +0100 From: Anthony Atkielski <atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Freebsd vs. linux Message-ID: <1443267912.20050212215132@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <200502121141.07311.bulliver@badcomputer.org> References: <200502112313.28082.hindrich@worldchat.com> <9162ea4ff171ffc111003a204c81ef7d@HiWAAY.net> <200502121141.07311.bulliver@badcomputer.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
darren kirby writes: > I think your interpretation here is a tad glib. I think it's right on the money. The entire Linux movement is fueled by hatred for Microsoft. And the ultimate goal of the Linux movement is to build an OS that walks, talks, and quacks like Microsoft Windows, but doesn't come from Redmond. To me, that seems like a waste of time and energy. The idea in itself of building an alternative desktop operating system is fine. But why does it have to look like Windows? The more closely a system approaches the look and feel of Windows, the less reason there is to use that system instead of Windows. And why use UNIX as a basis for a desktop GUI? Just because it's there? I know Apple was forced to resort to that, but that doesn't make it a good idea. > Do you think these people are writing any software? Are they designing > programming interfaces? Do they have a damn thing to do with the > development of Linux or any of its supporting software? Yes, a lot of them do. -- Anthony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1443267912.20050212215132>