Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 02:12:14 +0000 (GMT) From: Jonathon McKitrick <jcm@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> To: Lowell Gilbert <lowell@world.std.com> Cc: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Judge: "Gates Was Main Culprit" Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.02A.9911150211100.14584-100000@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> In-Reply-To: <rd63du8o91g.fsf@world.std.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14 Nov 1999, Lowell Gilbert wrote: >"David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com> writes: > >> Giorgos Keramidas wrote: > >> > However, one something is in the application level, i.e. programs like >> > the browser, the word processor, the mail reader, hell even the mail >> > transfer agent, it is no longer part of the OS. >> >> The line is very blurry. Where is command.com on MSDOS? Where is the >> defragmenter in Windows 98? Where is FreeBSD's 'sysctl'? Do you really want >> the government making the decision about what's part of an operating system >> and what isn't? I don't even think real technical experts can do it. > >Before the fuss over Microsoft's bundling IE with Windows, I always >considered ftp to be part of the operating system. On Windows *and* >Unix. And try as I might, I can't see a difference between that and a >browser, other than historical accident. > >Admittedly, you can have a usable system without either one, but >that's true of *most* of what ships with FreeBSD, and I always thought >a big advantage of FreeBSD was that it came as a "complete" system... > That may be true... but FreeBSD doesn't make it inconvenient for you to choose a different ftp program, or even write your own. It also doesn't decrease system performance even when you are *not* using it. -jonathon 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.BSF.4.02A.9911150211100.14584-100000>