From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 12 20:38:31 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 379EC16A4CE for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:38:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp11.wanadoo.fr (smtp11.wanadoo.fr [193.252.22.31]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB93343D2D for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 20:38:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mwinf1103.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1BBFB1C000A9 for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 21:38:30 +0100 (CET) Received: from pix.atkielski.com (ASt-Lambert-111-2-1-3.w81-50.abo.wanadoo.fr [81.50.80.3]) by mwinf1103.wanadoo.fr (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id E5EB31C0009B for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 21:38:29 +0100 (CET) X-ME-UUID: 20050212203829941.E5EB31C0009B@mwinf1103.wanadoo.fr Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 21:38:29 +0100 From: Anthony Atkielski X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <327155962.20050212213829@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <420E2E68.3050005@daleco.biz> References: <13116927.20050212032039@wanadoo.fr> <1327176360.20050212104749@wanadoo.fr> <420E2E68.3050005@daleco.biz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: Re: SPAM: Score 3.3: 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 20:38:31 -0000 Kevin Kinsey writes: > I'm guessing *you* are atypical in this. I know that I am not. About 95% of all problems with Windows machines are experienced by about 5% of the user base. The rest of the world has no problems. > Most of our Windows boxes are rather stable. But our FreeBSD ones are > simply rocks. It's true I can't just "pointy clicky" them into a > usable configuration, but the software runs for as long as we wish. All of my machines are rock stable, both FreeBSD and Windows. FreeBSD might win over the long run, but when both systems will run for years, the winner isn't that important. > That is in a rather direct opposition to the majority of our on-site > service calls for clients, which generally have to do with > troubleshooting software issues on Windows boxes related to "annoying > software failures", and "pop-ups, viruses, and malware". User errors, in other words. > There are thousands upon thousands times thousands of relatively > clueless users out there who do have problems with Windows whether > they know it or not. They would have the same problems with FreeBSD, or with any other OS. > For my office, a FreeBSD desktop makes a good bit of sense. I don't > have major software issues with FreeBSD, and my unit cost is a hundred > bucks or more less than a Windows desktop. I'd use FreeBSD on my desktop if I could, but I can't. I'd love to be able to save €400 in license fees per machine and have all the source code. -- Anthony