From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jun 22 00:58:35 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DB3E16A41F for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:58:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg) Received: from sarajevo.pacific.net.sg (sarajevo.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.134]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DA45843D49 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:58:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg) Received: (qmail 14689 invoked from network); 22 Jun 2005 00:58:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO maxwell6.pacific.net.sg) (203.120.90.212) by sarajevo with SMTP; 22 Jun 2005 00:58:30 -0000 Received: from [192.168.0.107] ([210.24.122.16]) by maxwell6.pacific.net.sg with ESMTP id <20050622005830.QYQC1233.maxwell6.pacific.net.sg@[192.168.0.107]>; Wed, 22 Jun 2005 08:58:30 +0800 Message-ID: <42B8B749.2090500@pacific.net.sg> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 08:56:41 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky Organization: oceanare pte ltd User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050514) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ted Mittelstaedt References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: questions@freebsd.org, Fafa Hafiz Krantz , advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Explaining FreeBSD features X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 00:58:35 -0000 Hi, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > >> >>Let's say this: >> >>Multi-threaded SMP architecture capable of executing the kernel >>in parallel on multiple processors, and with kernel preemption, >>allowing high priority kernel tasks to preempt other kernel >>activity, reducing latency. This includes a multi-threaded >>network stack and a multi-threaded virtual memory subsystem. >>With FreeBSD 6.x, support for a fully parallel VFS allows the >>UFS file system to run on multiple processors simultaneously, >>permitting load sharing of CPU-intensive I/O optimization. >> >>In the real world, that ought to sound more like: >> >>FreeBSD includes support for symmetric multiprocessing and >>multithreading. This makes the kernel lock down levels of >>interfaces and buffers, minimizing the chance of threads on >>different processors blocking each other, to give maximum >>performance on multiprocessor systems. >> The same old question pops up: what is the target audience. > > You see, the problem is that FreeBSD is not a general computer > operating system product. It is a very specific product in fact. > What is then the difference to Windows in this case? > FreeBSD is targeted at 2 main groups of people: > FreeBSD is used by the two groups. But it is not said that it could not be used by the third group. > 3) People who barely know how to push a button who have a problem > they need to fix with a computer operating system, and they > really don't care if they understand how the fix works as long > as it works. > I do not think that it the design of Windows which makes it target. It is the kind of support people with no knowledge get which makes it. > > This gives rise to a rather serious Catch-22 with FreeBSD: > > You need to really understand intimately how FreeBSD works > and how computer software that runs on it works in order to > get it to work well enough for you to learn intimately how it > works. > I do not think so. If people with no knowledge would get proper answers when they run into problems instead of the hint to read the manual would help a lot here. Those people will end in your group 2 which got the system setup by someone else. > Windows and Linux solved this Catch-22 by dumbing-down the > interface to their operating systems. Thus, an ignoramus > can get up and running with both of these systems, and that > person can remain fat, dumb, and happy, completely ignorant > of what he is doing, and those systems will still work enough > to get the job done. It may be a half-assed fix, but it is > better than nothing. > What is the difference to FreeBSD if the system is running once? > FreeBSD by contrast, long ago decided not to do this. For > starters, if you dumbed-down the FreeBSD interface, then to > most people FreeBSD wouldn't be any different than Linux > or Windows, so why mess with it? But, most importantly, a > dumbed-down interface gets in the way of a knowledgeable person, > and over time becomes a tremendous liability. > There is no need for an interface like this if the people starting with no computer knowledge would get proper help just to get the machine up and running. > With FreeBSD, the only way that a newbie can break the Catch-22 is > old-fashioned mental elbow grease. In short, by learning a bit > at a time, expanding on that, and repeating the process. It is a > long slow way to get to know anything, but once you get there, you > really do know everything in intimate detail. > Let it tell me this way. I have a neighbour who has a Ph.D. in biology. If she would give me the same answer when it comes to gardening, I would stop gardening as I do not want to know the background. All I want to know is how I can get rid of a special kind of pest. Erich