From owner-freebsd-advocacy Wed Apr 28 8:52: 7 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from gwdu60.gwdg.de (gwdu60.gwdg.de [134.76.10.60]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5918115720 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 1999 08:51:56 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from kheuer@gwdu60.gwdg.de) Received: from localhost (kheuer@localhost) by gwdu60.gwdg.de (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id RAA59502 for ; Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:51:36 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from kheuer@gwdu60.gwdg.de) Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 17:51:36 +0200 (CEST) From: Konrad Heuer To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: CHIP: Lies about FreeBSD Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG The popular German computer magazine CHIP 05/99 comes with an article about alternate (imagine the typical Windows user) PC operating systems. Among others, the authors mention Linux (6 pages), and they mention FreeBSD (1 page). They elaborately write about the new Linux 2.2 kernel, and they write one(!) sentence about 3.1-RELEASE after mentioning 3.0-R just unstable. Nothing about the large step from 2.2.8-R to 3.x-R. The description of the history of FreeBSD ist approximately correct, and they talk about internet service providers loving FreeBSD because of its performance. They state that FreeBSD is as an server OS at least as useful as Linux. So long, no problem. But: The authors also give statements which are incorrect and which sound very negative. Below I give some citations, and I try to translate and (=3D=3D>) comment: 1. "FreeBSD ist binaerkompatibel zu SCO-Unix, BSDI, NetBSD, Linux und zu 386BSD. Das bedeutet, dass (theoretisch) Programme dieser Plattformen auch auf FreeBSD laufen." FreeBSD comes with support for SCO-Unix, BSDI, NetBSD, Linux and 386BSD binaries. This means that in principal programs for that operating systems run under FreeBSD. =3D=3D> No word about the nearly perfect Linux emulation! Instead, the reader will believe that emulation doesn't work in practice! 2. "Weitaus schlimmer ist, dass FreeBSD auch keine ISA-Plug-and-play-Karten unterstuetzt." Much more worse - FreeBSD doesn't support ISA plug and play cards. =3D=3D> I really don't know how the authors could overlook PnP support in FreeBSD! 3. "Mit dem Entwicklungstempo von Linux kann die freie Unix-Familie mangels Entwickler- und Anwendermassen sowieso nicht mithalten. Kurz: Ein Betriebssystem fuer Fans, dessen Zukunft unklar ist." The free UNIX family [the authors talk about FreeBSD and NetBSD here] will inevitably fall behind Linux because there are too less developers and users. To be short: an operating system for fans with an obscure future. =3D=3D> Have the authors ever taken a look at the impressive step to 3.x-RELEASE? I'm in doubt! Have they really shown interest for any other alternate OS than Linux? What can we do? I will write a detailed comment about that article to the editorial office (redaktion@chip.de), and I'd like to encourage others to this as well. It's worse to read about FreeBSD in a negative context than to read nothing about it! The normal Windows user will never install FreeBSD after reading the article! One exception: he/she already knows FreeBSD and thus removes the magazine where it belongs - to the waste paper basket. Regards // // Konrad Heuer ____ ___ _____= __=20 // Gesellschaft f=FCr wissenschaftliche / __/______ ___ / _ )/ __= / _ \ // Datenverarbeitung mbH G=D6ttingen / _// __/ -_) -_) _ |\ \/= // / // Am Fa=DFberg, D-37077 G=D6ttingen /_/ /_/ \__/\__/____/___= /____/=20 // Deutschland (Germany) ----- The Power to Serve ----= - // http://www.freebsd.org // kheuer@gwdu60.gwdg.de // To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message