Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 17:30:47 +0300 From: Mihamina Rakotomandimby <mihamina@rktmb.org> To: "Hartmann, O." <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Cc: freebsd Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: http://www.freebsd.org/marketing/os-comparison.html Message-ID: <4E5CF417.5080503@rktmb.org> In-Reply-To: <4E5CF1ED.2030504@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <4E5941D6.9090106@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4E5BEF65.2010502@gmail.com> <4E5CAD9E.6050903@rktmb.org> <4E5CB49F.50806@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4E5CBC14.4080908@rktmb.org> <4E5CF1ED.2030504@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 08/30/2011 05:21 PM, Hartmann, O. wrote: > On 08/30/11 12:31, Mihamina Rakotomandimby wrote: >> On 08/30/2011 12:59 PM, Hartmann, O. wrote: >> But I also express my opinion that updating such a document should be >> done by a third party. > I slightly disagree with that. No problem > Who else than the developer/core team > members know better about what's > in and what's not in the FreeBSD box? So, for a features listing, it's OK. I really agree on turning it into a feature list. For a _comparison_, I think it's up to somewhere else: To really compare, it's mandatory to really now the multiple compared items. Who cares about the latest MS Windows internals (deep networking capability, filesystem tricks, kernel scheduler specs,...) in here? I migh be wrong, but IMHO "core devs" and "power users" wont spend time to deeply investigate on the other systems. Again, just an opinion. -- RMA.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E5CF417.5080503>