From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 7 11:50:36 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5146116A4B3 for ; Tue, 7 Oct 2003 11:50:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (duey.wolves.k12.mo.us [207.160.214.9]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CEF143F93 for ; Tue, 7 Oct 2003 11:50:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from cdillon@wolves.k12.mo.us) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89EF32012D; Tue, 7 Oct 2003 13:50:34 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mail.wolves.k12.mo.us ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (duey.wolves.k12.mo.us [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 34857-01-23; Tue, 7 Oct 2003 13:50:34 -0500 (CDT) Received: by mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 0B6EF20138; Tue, 7 Oct 2003 13:50:34 -0500 (CDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wolves.k12.mo.us (Postfix) with ESMTP id 097A11C755; Tue, 7 Oct 2003 13:50:34 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 7 Oct 2003 13:50:34 -0500 (CDT) From: Chris Dillon To: twig les In-Reply-To: <20031007175142.51813.qmail@web10102.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20031007130154.H31740@duey.wolves.k12.mo.us> References: <20031007175142.51813.qmail@web10102.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at wolves.k12.mo.us cc: Johnson David cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: Vulpes Velox Subject: Re: Rumour Mill on FreeBSD Death Still .... X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2003 18:50:36 -0000 On Tue, 7 Oct 2003, twig les wrote: > Just curious, is this a concern because they think OSs are rigidly > seperated into "Servers" and "Workstations" a la NT4? Or are they > just scared of FBSD because they haven't seen anyone running Ogle or > XMMS on it? I wouldn't say that Windows Server/Workstation are "rigidly separated" in the least bit. Windows "Server" and "Workstation" share absolutely everything in common except for some limitations placed purposefully on the "Workstation" version. You can use Windows Server as your "workstation" if you really wanted to waste the extra money you paid to acquire the Server version. There is one relatively high-profile server operating system which really does have no function other than to be a "server", and that is Novell Netware. With Netware in mind, it is easy to see how someone might think that it is actually _impossible_ to use FreeBSD as a workstation. If someone really needs a server/workstation dichotomy, then FreeBSD can be likened to Windows Server (version irrelevant), since it is fully-functional in BOTH server and workstation roles, but unlike Windows you still don't have to pay any money if you want it to act in a server role. -- Chris Dillon - cdillon(at)wolves.k12.mo.us FreeBSD: The fastest and most stable server OS on the planet - Available for IA32, IA64, PC98, Alpha, and UltraSPARC architectures - x86-64, PowerPC, ARM, MIPS, and S/390 under development - http://www.freebsd.org Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon?