Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 5 May 1999 11:23:32 -0400 (EDT)
From:      James Howard <howardjp@wam.umd.edu>
To:        jgrosch@MooseRiver.com
Cc:        Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, jmutter@netwalk.com, "Viren R. Shah" <viren@rstcorp.com>, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: PCWeek article by Anne Chen -- Comments
Message-ID:  <Pine.OSF.3.95q.990505112149.15848A-100000@poirot.umd.edu>
In-Reply-To: <19990505081901.B24172@ontario.mooseriver.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 5 May 1999, Josef Grosch wrote:

> On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 10:50:37PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
> > It does reflect the weaknesses in the current marketing and promotion
> > of FreeBSD. In particular, the article mentions the lack of native
> > application support. (Running Linux binaries under emulation isn't 
> > acceptable to the IT crowd; the platform must be SUPPORTED by the 
> > application vendor.)

I've been using FreeBSD for years and have no objection to running Linux
programs in emulation mode.  However, I have seen this by IT people
before.  Maybe it would be more advantagous to rephrase it as "Native
Linux Binary" support or something similar just to catch those in IT who
aren't bright enough to understand what that means.

Jamie



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




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.OSF.3.95q.990505112149.15848A-100000>