From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 12 12:19:56 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DA4F16A4CE for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:19:56 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp11.wanadoo.fr (smtp11.wanadoo.fr [193.252.22.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12D8B43D2F for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:19:56 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf1108.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 4C9D41C0009B for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:19:55 +0100 (CET) Received: from pix.atkielski.com (ASt-Lambert-111-2-1-3.w81-50.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.50.80.3]) by mwinf1108.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1F72F1C00099 for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:19:55 +0100 (CET) X-ME-UUID: 20050212121955129.1F72F1C00099@mwinf1108.wanadoo.fr Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 13:19:54 +0100 From: Anthony Atkielski X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <466726127.20050212131954@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <200502120402.56761.reso3w83@verizon.net> References: <200502120318.18929.reso3w83@verizon.net> <200502120402.56761.reso3w83@verizon.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 12:19:56 -0000 Michael C. Shultz writes: > That was obvious by your confusion with Firefox an opera for example. What confusion? Firefox exists only for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux. All of these require a GUI to work. I don't run a GUI on my FreeBSD machine. The only browser I have installed on FreeBSD is lynx. Opera has a wider selection of platforms (including FreeBSD), but it's still a GUI browser. > You admit you don't know what is in ports yet feel it is OK to > say FreeBSD is a poor desktop? I can say that based on the OS alone. > Ever heard the saying "better to remain silent and thought a fool....."? Yes. > How do you know? You just admitted you don't use what is in ports... Because I've checked with the vendors for these products. They ought to know. > Why would you say FreeBSD is a poor desktop when your only desktop > experience is with windows? I do have desktop experience with FreeBSD. I tried it briefly and abandoned it. It was so lame compared to Windows that it didn't take but a day or two to realize that it was a waste of my time. I don't have any emotional investment in operating systems, so I just went back to Windows. > I don't blame you, when something goes wrong on a Windows system > the solution is usually to reinstall everything. No more so than with any other OS. The main reason I disallow automatic updates is that I want to know exactly what is being installed on the machine at all times. > FreeBSD is a bit more robust than that. No, it's not. It's neither better nor worse. But in a production environment, you never do any updates automatically, anyway. > On this point I guess you'll have to take my word > seeing as you have no experience with FreeBSD as a desktop.... Just as you've taken my word about the number of applications I run simultaneously on Windows? > Why do you feel you are qualified to say FreeBSD is a poor desktop > again? Because I've used it for that purpose, along with a number of other operating systems. Windows wins by a handsome margin. The closest competitor is the Mac. Nothing else is even in the running. > bullshit Tell me again about how I should take your word for things. > bullshit. You are a flat out liar friend. If you actually used these operating systems, you would know otherwise. > NTFS frags, and slows down noticeably if you fail to defrag it. I have not noticed that. > I'll assume your line of work is not database related... I don't currently run database servers. But database servers have a lot of issues relating to performance, not just file-system fragmentation. > I'm sure it does, in your dreams. This brings back such distant memories! -- Anthony