Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 01:13:59 -0500 From: "James F. Schmidt" <jschmidt@cessys.com> To: "'dmaddox@scsn.net'" <dmaddox@scsn.net>, Snob Art Genre <ben@narcissus.ml.org> Cc: "questions@FreeBSD.ORG" <questions@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: FreeBSD vs. NT Message-ID: <01BC60CD.4C2B4E80@ras02.cessys.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi All,
I can't resist increasing the noise level a bit... I changed the subject line to one that is more
appropriate.
First, I will say that I am new to UNIX and installed FreeBSD a few weeks ago with no problems. We presently have a full NT network with a PDC, BDC, etc. blah blah blah....
In my NT list groups I learned about FreeBSD because there are so many things that you can do
rather easily with FreeBSD that NT cannot.
As an example, you can dust off your old 486DX-66 with 16MB RAM and turn it into:
1. An FTP Server
2. Telnet Server
3. SMTP Server
4. HTTP Server
5. Router
6. FireWall
7. Gateway
8. Quota Manager
(... And this is vanilla stuff as far as FreeBSD is concerned!)
To name a few valuable features that NT does not offer without a significant system, eg: Pentium 166 w/ 64MB RAM, 2 GB HDD... and tons of thrid party software and hardware...
In my opinion (and I am a very strong NT user), the NT GUI platform has crippled the OS. It is
a major resource hog. Do any of you run Office '97 under NT? MS Word hangs on to 16MB RAM
alone (this is a code stub)...
An ISP does not need a GUI (X or NT) to run HTTP, FTP, or Shell Accounts.
That horsepower can be put to better use. Some of the simpliest tasks in NT
become a major experience because they must interact with the GUI.
As an example, compare the speed in establishing a network share using Explorer vs.
the command prompt using NET USE... There is a lightening difference. Case in point.
NT has its place but I have found that FreeBSD has also a very significant place in our Intranet!
Jim
-----Original Message-----
From: Donald J. Maddox [SMTP:root@cola77.scsn.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 1997 11:23 PM
To: Snob Art Genre
Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.1.7 and COMPAT_43 -Reply
On Wed, May 14, 1997 at 08:19:36PM -0700, Snob Art Genre wrote:
> Do you really attribute NT's success to its lack of confusing kernel
> options and the like? Come on . . . if NT really tended to DTRT where
> FreeBSD didn't you'd be using NT instead.
>
> On Wed, 14 May 1997, Donald J. Maddox wrote:
>
> > I can see that this is about to turn into one of those 'BSD-tradition vs.
> > common sense' debates, and I have no desire to participate in that; common
> > sense cannot win because the traditionalists never relent, and without
> > consensus, the status quo remains just that.
> >
> > Meanwhile, WindowsNT's market share continues to climb, supplanting what
> > *might* have been FreeBSD market share... Too bad for us that they aren't
> > saddled with a 'traditional' steep learning curve...
No, that's not what I meant. I'm not qualified to do an in-depth anaylsis of
NT's success; however, I _know_ that an appreciable number of people who might
have chosen a UNIX-like OS end up giving up in frustration... Just _installing_
most UNIX-alikes is a daunting task for the average user, and once they _do_
manage to get to their first login: prompt, they find themselves in a foreign
place where the signposts are not all that obvious. If they ask for help, they
are likely to be greeted by RTFM and UTSL, and they often don't know what
FM to R.
Most of the 'traditionalists' would probably say that we are better off keeping
the clueless out of the club, and maybe that's a valid point of view. But some
of us would like to see more commercial support for FreeBSD, and the way to get
that is obviously to increase the user base, even if it means inviting in the
unwashed masses.
In short, I think that anything that can be done to flatten the learning
curve, to make the install easier, to make customizing the environment easier,
especially when it comes at no real cost (like friendlier kernel config
files, for example) is a Good Thing, and will help us, at least a little,
to minimize the advantage that NT has with it's familiar Windows interface,
etc.
Donald J. Maddox
(dmaddox@scsn.net)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?01BC60CD.4C2B4E80>