Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 04:32:50 -0700 From: Joshua Tinnin <krinklyfig@spymac.com> To: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Message-ID: <200407210432.51429.krinklyfig@spymac.com> In-Reply-To: <20040720225420.S33865@chylonia.3miasto.net> References: <20040717194809.33690.qmail@web14204.mail.yahoo.com> <200407171347.23351.krinklyfig@spymac.com> <20040720225420.S33865@chylonia.3miasto.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tuesday 20 July 2004 01:55 pm, Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@tensor.3miasto.net> wrote: > > Eh ... well, I tend to ignore that when making a decision to use an OS or > > i tend to not ignore that - just i use it as argument against. > > less popular software (and with less information noise with it) is better. > this rule works for years. Since FreeBSD is very popular as a webserver OS, I wonder if your logic means it's not as good as, say, running a website on Amiga. Don't get me wrong, as I think Amiga's cool ... Would you not want to run a website on FreeBSD, since so many sites do? I guess this also means Apache is garbage, since it's so popular. What are you going to do if FreeBSD becomes even more popular? Quit using it? Here's something you might want to check out: http://www.sics.se/~adam/contiki/ - and I also think this is cool, as my first computer was an Apple IIe, but is it what you need? It's far less popular than FreeBSD, so maybe that means it's better. I'm not trying to be obnoxious, but I don't really see your logic. - jt
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200407210432.51429.krinklyfig>