From owner-freebsd-stable Tue Jul 24 16:21:27 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mailfarm.ipfnet.net (mailfarm.ipfnet.net [195.211.129.222]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D09A037B405 for ; Tue, 24 Jul 2001 16:21:22 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ml-freebsd-stable@phobgate.de) Received: from [192.168.2.94] (router-195-211-129.ipfnet.net [195.211.129.1]) (authenticated) by mailfarm.ipfnet.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f6ONLL655633 for ; Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:21:21 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 01:20:24 +0200 From: alex Reply-To: alex To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD needs to awake and come out of SERVER only market! Message-ID: <3886578923.996024024@[192.168.2.94]> In-Reply-To: <3885816596.996023261@[192.168.2.94]> X-Mailer: Mulberry/2.0.8 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Sorry, i meant if something has _more_ usability, it is _less_ stable/secure. When you offer more options to make something secure and this stuff, the user is confused and probably chooses the wrong options, or none. if you offer less options, the perfect combination for this user maybe isn't available.. and so on. nobody is perfect :) Alex --On Mittwoch, 25. Juli 2001 01:07 +0200 alex wrote: > In ~90% something that has more usability it is more stable and/or > secure. Thats a fact, sorry. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message