From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 13 12:40:07 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0883E16A50C for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:40:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from asmtp02.eresmas.com (asmtp02.eresmas.com [62.81.235.142]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD39E43D45 for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:40:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ea1abz@wanadoo.es) Received: from [192.168.108.54] (helo=mx01.eresmas.com) by asmtp02.eresmas.com with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1D0J2j-0002nN-Pn for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:40:05 +0100 Received: from [80.103.1.183] (helo=[80.103.1.183]) by mx01.eresmas.com with asmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1D0J2j-0005cz-2n for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:40:05 +0100 Message-ID: <420F4254.90500@wanadoo.es> Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 13:04:36 +0100 From: Ramiro Aceves User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.9 (X11/20041124) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org References: <200502112313.28082.hindrich@worldchat.com> <9162ea4ff171ffc111003a204c81ef7d@HiWAAY.net> <200502121141.07311.bulliver@badcomputer.org> <1443267912.20050212215132@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <1443267912.20050212215132@wanadoo.fr> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.89.0.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) Subject: Re: Freebsd vs. linux X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 12:40:07 -0000 Anthony Atkielski wrote: > darren kirby writes: > > >>I think your interpretation here is a tad glib. > > > I think it's right on the money. The entire Linux movement is fueled by > hatred for Microsoft. And the ultimate goal of the Linux movement is to > build an OS that walks, talks, and quacks like Microsoft Windows, but > doesn't come from Redmond. I do not think that the ultimate goal of the Linux movement is to build an OS that walks, talks, and quacks, the goal of Linux is to make a OS that can do whatever you want. It can talk, walk if you need it, it can be a server if you need it. It is a matter of configuring it for your needs. > > To me, that seems like a waste of time and energy. I do not understand ... > > The idea in itself of building an alternative desktop operating system > is fine. But why does it have to look like Windows? The more closely a > system approaches the look and feel of Windows, the less reason there is > to use that system instead of Windows. My Linux system do not look like windows, and never will. For example, many people use wmaker as a window manager, and I does not have anything to do with windows looking. Do not generalize when you use the word Linux, not every linux distribution has got the same goals. > > And why use UNIX as a basis for a desktop GUI? Just because it's there? Because if you use a GUI ontop a better kernel, the resultint OS will be better, and again, they are free and MS is not free.