Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:12:58 -0700 From: Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why FreeBSD not popular on hardware vendors Message-ID: <20081212181258.GE36348@kokopelli.hydra> In-Reply-To: <20081212120437.B3687@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> References: <1228733482.4495.14.camel@laptop1.herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20081211103742.21621a6d@gom.home> <20081211190951.GB845@comcast.net> <20081211113257.405a082c@gom.home> <20081211202023.GC845@comcast.net> <20081211134622.15c81ecd@gom.home> <20081212002813.GD32300@kokopelli.hydra> <20081211170011.777236f8@gom.home> <20081212015814.GB32982@kokopelli.hydra> <20081212120437.B3687@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 12:05:20PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: > > > >So . . . are you saying that increased support for 3D accelerated > >graphics is not an "improvement", and should therefore not be considered > >a worthy goal? > > full support of open hardware standards is an requirement. > > support for closed hardware standards isn't important. I disagree. I believe, rather, that support for closed hardware specs isn't *as* important -- but is still at least somewhat important. -- Chad Perrin [ content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ] My first programming koan: If a lambda has the ability to access its context, but there isn't any context to access -- is it still a closure? [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD) iEYEARECAAYFAklCqaoACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKVDDwCgzqCojq+ZVHyIl15aCJ0SIgXI cdIAoJIGXhb30pwAG4bSm4ds4tCxwPSr =gG7S -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20081212181258.GE36348>