Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 23 Sep 2002 23:18:21 +0100
From:      Jamie Jones <jamie@host-997.news.landeg.com>
To:        freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Fwd: Opera press release
Message-ID:  <200209232318.21194.jamie@host-997.news.landeg.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I believe you can use the license for the FreeBSD version too :).

Ahhhh that's good news then! I understand the windows and linux license k=
eys
are different, so I assumed the FreeBSD one would be too.

It just gets better and better!

I remember in an advocacy thread a long time ago saying that I'd pay for
a native FreeBSD version, but not a Linux version.. Well, I gave in..

The replies to my message asked me what a FreeBSD version would do
that the Linux version doesn't.

Also there was another long thread a while ago instigated by a "Brett" wh=
o
said that the Linux emulation layer effectively removes any need for a
commercial company to release a FreeBSD specific version of a product..
Obviously, in this case, its (eventually) not true.

In light of these 2 threads, I'd like to ask what the advantage of a Free=
BSD
version is (from a technical, not a PR point of view.. obvious its great =
PR=20
news), and why Opera have decided to release a native FreeBSD version ?

Anyone know, or have any ideas ? From my point of view, I feel its "clean=
er"
to run something native, that can hopefully take advantage of some of the
FreeBSD features, but then, I sometimes can't escape these puritanical=20
thoughts whilst I'm stuck in my Ivory Tower :-)

Jamie

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200209232318.21194.jamie>