From owner-freebsd-advocacy Sat Jul 8 21: 5:21 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from jasper.nighttide.net (jasper.nighttide.net [216.227.178.18]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C8D537BFD8 for ; Sat, 8 Jul 2000 21:05:17 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from darren@nighttide.net) Received: from localhost (darren@localhost) by jasper.nighttide.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA12299 for ; Sun, 9 Jul 2000 00:05:13 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 9 Jul 2000 00:05:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Darren Henderson To: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Emulation (Was: No port of Opera?) In-Reply-To: <3966B177.805696E4@mail.ptd.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, 8 Jul 2000, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: > Brett Glass wrote: > > > > I'm certainly not going to trust a mission-critical, or even important, > > application to emulation. I want to be able to get high-quality > > commercial software which has been compiled and tested for the native > > API and is supported on the platform I'm running. And that means native > > code. > > If that is generally true, then the existence of Linux binary support > will not deter vendors from porting to FreeBSD, because customers will > not be using their products with the Linux layer. I don't know if that is generally true but I hope it is. I certainly won't purchase linux software from a vendor. Actually I won't/haven't installed the api conversion layer. I've simply seen no need for it. If Opera produces a native FreeBSD version of their product I would quite likely buy it. Until then however I have plenty of options without having to resort to running the linux version. While I don't buy the extremes of the argument I suspect that the presence of the conversion layer is some what of a deterent to vendors producing native versions of their wares. However I doubt many of them would produce a FreeBSD version even if the conversion layer wasn't there. I think Linux probably has more of a workstation image and BSD more of a server image. Why produce a wordprocessor (for example) for a market that is mainly populated with servers, (in their eyes)? ______________________________________________________________________ Darren Henderson darren@nighttide.net Help fight junk e-mail, visit http://www.cauce.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message