Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 07:23:20 -0400 From: Jerry <jerry@seibercom.net> To: FreeBSD <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Is this something we (as consumers of FreeBSD) need to be aware of? Message-ID: <20120610072320.43359222@scorpio> In-Reply-To: <1D0D020B-1F05-4546-A15C-8A721C7BC4AC@my.gd> References: <d0d8129924f70fbd791ef9e3fb088e9b@anonymitaet-im-inter.net> <0B9FF530-AAE8-4411-8B06-2AD5662CB803@my.gd> <20120609164855.GB31721@hemlock.hydra> <1D0D020B-1F05-4546-A15C-8A721C7BC4AC@my.gd>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 03:27:25 +0200 Damien Fleuriot articulated: >On 9 Jun 2012, at 18:48, Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 06, 2012 at 11:42:37PM +0200, Damien Fleuriot wrote: >>> >>> On 6 Jun 2012, at 21:52, Dave U. Random >>> <anonymous@anonymitaet-im-inter.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Polytropon <freebsd@edvax.de> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Wed, 06 Jun 2012 11:47:11 +0100, Matthew Seaman wrote: >>>>>> Having to pay Verisign instead of Microsoft makes no difference: >>>>>> the point is why should I have to pay anything to a third party >>>>>> in order to run whatever OS I want on a piece of hardware I own? >>>> >>>> It's time to dump the Intel/Microshaft mafia forever. FreeBSD, >>>> OpenBSD, NetBSD, and even Linux have ports to many platforms. Why >>>> stay on Intel? It's an overgrown ugly mess. >>>> >>>> We need to stop buying Intel mafiaware with preinstalled >>>> Microshaft mafiware and run a free (or in the case of Linux >>>> "apparently free") OS on free hardware. >>>> >>>> There are increasing numbers of SBCs and plenty of used servers on >>>> Ebay. They're all built better than commodity Intel mafiaware. Good >>>> riddance! >>>> >>> You have no idea what you're talking about. >>> >>> This kind of religious propaganda post is neither constructive nor >>> helpful. >> >> It should be noted that your tone is neither constructive nor >> helpful, to say nothing of your contentless response. Do you have >> anything useful to say in response to what Dave U. Random >> contributed -- perhaps a thoughtful refutation of some specific >> point(s)? I hope you have more of value to contribute than your >> obvious disdain for people who disagree with you about something >> (without even specifying on what points you disagree). >> >If you had bothered to read all the other mails I've posted on this >very specific thread, you wouldn't need to ask the question. > >If you're going to participate in the Linux zealots' propaganda that >makes OSS defenders sound so ridiculous and delusional, so be it. > >Fact is, if Microsoft didn't deliver acceptable products, people >wouldn't use them. Calling them a mafia is neither constructive (I >invite you to look up the word mafia in a thesaurus), nor backed up by >actual facts. > >OP is just going on a rampage about MS and intel. > >You want to follow his advice and advocate the exclusive use of alpha >machines ? I guess we'll have to agree to disagree here. >No, I'm not gonna use alphas. >And no, I'm not going to let a random person (hey, choice words !) >call intel or MS a mafia just because he's on a zealot crusade. > >You might want to take a minute to consider the contributions of both >to computing. Without MS (and IBM amongst others) it's possible that >computing would never have reached such an audience as it has. So I'm >going with the (possibly false) assumption that without MS and other >major actors, not many people would use computers nowadays. All this >magnificent OSS wouldn't be of much use then. After all, who would >need FreeBSD servers to host web sites that had neither visitors nor >purpose ? > >One might see MS as the ultimate evil, yet they're strongly >implemented in corporate IT. One might wonder why, before engaging in >a crusade, and brandishing empty words as their weapons. > >I invite you to re-read OP's post and highlight what in "mafiaware", >"wintel" and "microshaft" you find constructive. I also invite you to >read all his points about why exactly intel is an "overgrown ugly >mess". I regret to report I have found none, might you point them out >for me ? > >Now, I shall leave you to read my other posts on this "secure boot" >topic, that you might quit claiming I have nothing to >contribute._______________________________________________ It is fairly easy to understand both sides in this discussion. When Microsoft supporters refer to open-source software as "open-sore" or "socialist-software" the FOSS community becomes enraged. However, when the open-source community retaliates it is considered acceptable. Quite frankly I read far more Microsoft based forums than open-source based ones and I can say without a doubt, at least in my experience, Microsoft proponents never attack open-source with the venomous hatred that open-source attacks Microsoft. In fact, the majority of Microsoft users that I know could not care less about what they consider an overly burdensome (geeky) open-source operating system. The whole argument can probably be boiled do to this: Disparaging other operating systems (Microsoft) and pointing out its failures is beneficial, constructive and therapeutic. Pointing out problems and failures regarding your own OS is destructive and flame bait. -- Jerry ♔ Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored. Please do not ignore the Reply-To header. __________________________________________________________________
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120610072320.43359222>