Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:31:06 +0930
From:      Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>
To:        impaqds@bellsouth.net, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Mass Confusion
Message-ID:  <19981013143106.D21983@freebie.lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <199810130443.AAA27067@mail.lig.bellsouth.net>; from impaqds@bellsouth.net on Tue, Oct 13, 1998 at 12:48:16AM -0400
References:  <199810130443.AAA27067@mail.lig.bellsouth.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Format autorecovered at freebie.lemis.com]

On Tuesday, 13 October 1998 at  0:48:16 -0400, impaqds@bellsouth.net wrote:
>     After spending a hour on dozens of web pages concerning  FREEBSD
> I decided to download the OS and try it out.
>     Funny thing. I cannot find one single reference on any ftp  readme
> or index file that tells me what specific name the FREEBSD  OS is
> listed under. I found hundreds of files and sub directories with
> absolute zero information as to what constitutes the stand alone OS
> itself. I understand the developer code files and the porting add ons
> in the file listing,but nowhere is there specific names or instructions
> for the stand alone FREEBSD OS anywhere. Come on guys ! If you  want
> this thing to be used and developed like UNIX you must cut the  OS
> distribution files for installation loose from thousands of
> supplementary and confusing listings.

I suppose the Subject: describes the problem quite well: yes, you're
confused.  The FreeBSD (not FREEBSD) operating system is called
FreeBSD.

> I have talked to other developers about FREEBSD and they tried your
> home site and managed to download hundreds of files,but no complete
> OS. I see why they stuck with UNIX.

FreeBSD is UNIX.  I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

> I just wanted to see what the problems were. I can see very clearly
> why FREEBSD is not a mainstrem OS like Linux. It is too hard to
> identify and download the main OS !

No, the reason why FreeBSD is not as well distributed (I don't think
I'd use the word "mainstream" in distinguishing between them) is
because of the USL wars.  USL (UNIX Systems Laboratories) was the arm
of AT&T that, in 1992, was responsible for development and marketing
of UNIX System V.  They objected to the release of BSD UNIX, and sued
the various distributors of BSD UNIX.  There was finally an
out-of-court settlement, and one of the conditions was that BSDs would
no longer use UNIX in their name.

>  Do not take this the wrong way. This is not a spam or a flame,just
> a comment from a confused individual.As a WINDOWS NT network manager
> I am always looking for alternatives to cut costs. I looked at LINUX
> and got ill just reading the docs.; it has a long way to go.

In fact, I thought the Linux docs, while by no means perfect, weren't
too bad.  We're still considering adapting some of their documents to
FreeBSD.

> Remember guys you are trying to convert millions of DOS and WINDOWS
> users and developers

Are we?  That's an assumption.  We never cared too much about people
who weren't bothered to think.

> who expect flawless one click downloads in a GUI environment. Most
> run screaming and shaken when confronted with any text based
> instructions. 

In other words, they can't read?

> Sorry but that's the real world for the majority of new age PC
> owners.I deal with them every day and they get dumber every year.

That may be.  But to be quite honest, I don't personally care too
much.  There are enough people left who can tell the difference
between an operating system and a marketing gimmick, and we're quite
busy helping them.  Remember, we don't make any money out of this.

Greg
--
See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers
finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19981013143106.D21983>