Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2012 16:41:10 +1000 From: Da Rock <freebsd-questions@herveybayaustralia.com.au> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Kernel Internals Documentation Message-ID: <4F02A306.5060501@herveybayaustralia.com.au> In-Reply-To: <20120103020611.GA22209@chancha.local> References: <4EFF19A7.2060800@ose.nl> <CAGy-%2Bi_SatydS_=a_pOVN6uwBfN2rU7kYWy78Ug=Nq=j3WrrAA@mail.gmail.com> <CAGy-%2Bi_QW78ezYv22YGUg3UCNa4xWdAnKfPMkQxGBfmmiDjK0g@mail.gmail.com> <4EFF94CA.3050304@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20120101064247.3e8b0b56@scorpio> <4F00580D.1060208@herveybayaustralia.com.au> <20120101091420.117aa8f3@scorpio> <20120102065526.GA16481@hemlock.hydra> <20120102083114.6c09d839@scorpio> <20120102193319.GA31717@hemlock.hydra> <20120103020611.GA22209@chancha.local>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01/03/12 12:06, Walter Alejandro Iglesias wrote: > On Mon, Jan 02, 2012 at 12:33:20PM -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: >> Ubuntu, actually, has thrown out the baby with the bathwater. In its >> zeal to make things "just work" in a particular manner, it seems >> hell-bent on ignoring all but one way to do things, even as it tries to >> dominate its entire market niche to the extent that it eclipses and >> marginalizes alternatives. >> > My two cents with other point of view: > > OSs need popularity; it encourages hardware manufacturers to > write drivers and, even better, share the source. That makes > the existence of Ubuntu necessary for linux and indirectly to > freebsd. > > To blame Bill or Steve and appeal to the freedom of users is > demagogy since the real dictator are the users themselves. > Unfortunately, average final user profile is nearer to my mother > in law (she obviously uses MS Windows) than people with > professional specific needs like you and me. > > Negate or hide obvious FreeBSD (or Linux) limitations is the > same error than making look Ubuntu easier than it really is or > worse, make it look like something that it definitely is not. > New users feel fooled or betrayed, that's why some of them > reacts complaining. Anyway I don't feel confident enough to > assure if this is a good or bad marketing strategy. I remember, > in a very bad network curse I did some years ago, a young > classmate that after seeing for the first time the KDE desktop > disappointed exclaimed: But, It is like Windows! > > I think the better strategy at long term is to be honest. Other > point to consider is that the statements done by who initiated > this thread are a "goal"; a goal does not need to be "possible" > to be useful; they are necessary like a projection, like an > idea. > I agree entirely. My bias is toward the attitude and ethics of the corporations themselves- and their CEO's who run them. I believe in honesty, and I hold a grudge against those in marketing management who simply have no concept of truth- with the exception of whoever wrote one of my marketing textbooks (which I may point out was only used once as the powers that be - the so called gurus - promptly withdrew in the next semester. It apparently didn't agree with "popular" management theory, and was replaced with a 50 year old textbook on the subject). New users are nearly always dismayed at the apparent difficulty of things, and should be warned that they will need to do some work "under the hood" in order to get what they want. The honesty can start immediately, it doesn't necessarily have to be a goal.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F02A306.5060501>