From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 9 13:02:36 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0711B16A4CE for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 13:02:36 -0800 (PST) Received: from ocswall2.fda.gov (ocswall2.fda.gov [198.77.181.8]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 86C9A43D1D for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 13:02:35 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from DrewsJ@cder.fda.gov) Received: from no.name.available by ocswall2.fda.gov via smtpd (for mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) with SMTP; 9 Mar 2004 21:02:35 UT Received: from 150.148.145.221 by cdsmms01.cder.fda.gov with ESMTP ( Tumbleweed MMS SMTP Relay (MMS v5.5.1)); Tue, 09 Mar 2004 16:02:24 -0400 Received: by cdsx02.cder.fda.gov with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19 ) id ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 16:02:24 -0500 Message-ID: <4C88DC099E9AF945A6DA4D6FFA1865D17D7292@cdsx06.cder.fda.gov> From: "Drews, Jonathan*" To: "'Freebsd-Advocacy (E-mail)" Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2004 16:02:23 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) X-WSS-ID: 6C50EF6A1379114-01-01 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: FreeBSD desktop or free version of Windows ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 21:02:36 -0000 Are these hypothetical "Joe Sixpack" folks looking for a free version of Windows or do they want an open source UNIX? Is it desirable to produce a Microsoft like version of FreeBSD? dashevil writes: > I just rant a bit first, sorry :p] I may be part of a startling minority within the *nix/BSD > community when I believe that they are (even Linux) FAR from being ready for home usage by, say, > Joe Sixpack, or whatever cliche home user image you have in mind. I wonder if it is "safe" to make FreeBSD "fool proof". I think it's a bad idea to attempt to reduce a general purpose computer to toaster oven simplicity (IMHO). Which is what I perceive Microsoft tries to do. My experiences with Mandrake Linux's or SuSE's YaST installer was that they did not add much in the way of disaster recovery. That is if the install choked I was no better off than if I was using sysinstall. I also think the current /stand/sysinstall is just fine. ____ ___ _______ / __/______ ___ / _ )/ __/ _ \ / _// __/ -_) -_) _ |\ \/ // / /_/ /_/ \__/\__/____/___/____/