From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Dec 2 10:17:25 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from freebie.atkielski.com (ASt-Lambert-101-2-1-14.abo.wanadoo.fr [193.251.59.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD08237B417 for ; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 10:17:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from contactdish (win.atkielski.com [10.0.0.10]) by freebie.atkielski.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with SMTP id fB2IGax17615; Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:16:37 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from anthony@freebie.atkielski.com) Message-ID: <00d801c17b5d$7c7fcd90$0a00000a@atkielski.com> From: "Anthony Atkielski" To: "Doug Reynolds" , "Mike Meyer" Cc: References: <200112021647.fB2Gl2x17334@freebie.atkielski.com> Subject: Re: Feeding the Troll (Was: freebsd as a desktop ?) Date: Sun, 2 Dec 2001 19:16:36 +0100 Organization: Anthony's Home Page (development site) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Doug writes: > surprisingly enough, i agree with you here. So does the market, apparently, since most desktops are Windows, whereas most servers are still running UNIX (as far as I know). > from a basic X setup, it _really_ _really_ sucks. > I admit that. but if you spend the couple days / > weeks, its not bad. The average user does not want to spend more than a couple of _minutes_ to set things up. Only geeks with nothing else do to are willing to spend days or weeks on such a task. > that is because it is free, so don't bitch. Commercial versions of UNIX are not necessarily any better. > ie Windows 2000 as a server Or Windows NT, or any version of Windows, for that matter. > actually, you can leave out Win2000. it is garbage. > I've been running it off and on, it doesn't have > any 3d support, the video drivers for it lockup > randomly, and the print sharing sucks ... Hmm. I've heard mostly rave reviews about Windows 2000. I don't run it myself because Windows NT already does everything I require, and I don't want to risk going through exactly the sort of thing that you describe above. I _know_ that everything on my machine works correctly now under Windows NT, so why would I upgrade to Windows 2000 and spend six months trying to achieve parity with what I already have today? > it is going bye - bye as soon as i convert back to > FAT32. (dumbass me converted to ntfs). Windows NT is nice, although, if you weren't using NT to begin with, changing from 2000 to NT would just be a lateral move, with the same problems. So would changing to any other operating system, for that matter. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message