Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 21:05:40 -0800 (PST) From: "Jeremy C. Reed" <reed@reedmedia.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SPAM: Score 3.3: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.43.0502112100490.32296-100000@pilchuck.reedmedia.net> In-Reply-To: <13116927.20050212032039@wanadoo.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 12 Feb 2005, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > That depends on the OS to which you compare it. In isolation, FreeBSD > works on the desktop, just as most UNIX operating systems do, but in > comparison to Windows or the Mac, it's a rather sorry excuse for a > desktop. But no OS can do it all, no matter how religiously its > proponents might believe otherwise. I guess this depends on how "desktop" is defined. Being able to run a desktop for over a hundred days without reboots, without annoying continuous software failures, without worry of malicious (or anoying) pop-ups, virus, and malware, and being able to quickly do my desktop work is a good reason to use an open source Unix desktop. I guess Mac OS X can meet these goals. But can't meet the need to be able to use a good functional desktop on old, out-dated, slow hardware. (Nevertheless, it is not time to advertise FreeBSD as a "desktop" alternative.) Jeremy C. Reed BSD News, BSD tutorials, BSD links http://www.bsdnewsletter.com/
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.43.0502112100490.32296-100000>