Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 01:01:08 -0800 From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> To: "Wes Peters" <wes@dobox.com>, <stephens@cnet.com> Cc: <freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Maxtor picks Windows, dumps open source Message-ID: <001f01c0a61b$fbbbf1a0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> In-Reply-To: <3AA42B11.9EE89750@dobox.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
What I found most interesting was that according to Maxtor, this product is brand-new, thus it's never been touched by a customer before. It would have been more impressive if they had released this product onto the market with FreeBSD on it, and then withdrew it later. If that was the case, their competence with FreeBSD would give some credibility to their statements. However, as it stands now with this product, Maxtor has proved neither competence with FreeBSD, nor competence with Windows 2000. All they have shown is that they have been competent in using the threat of FreeBSD to extract additional licensing concessions from Microsoft. At this time I don't even see any proof that they were even running FreeBSD on their product. Rather than a denoucement of FreeBSD, if you read between the lines you will see that this is actually quite a feather in FreeBSD's cap. The story headline would have been more accurately written: "Microsoft gives up Client Licensing revenue to keep Maxtor from using FreeBSD on their new storage product" Then, all you would have had to do was reorder the quotes in the article so that Mr. Wilkin's comments about being the first licensee to get free CAL on Win2K were first, and Mr. Wilkin's quotes about FreeBSD not supporting such and such were last, and the article would have fitted the headline perfectly. Don't forget that Cnet is a profit-making business and has no choice but to write the article in such a manner as to gain the most interest. People are tired of reading articles titled "Microsoft this" and "Microsoft that" they want to read about the alternatives to Microsoft. This story was headlined as a FreeBSD story, not a Microsoft story, even though it's really just another story about Microsoft wheeling and dealing. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com >-----Original Message----- >From: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG >[mailto:owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Wes Peters >Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 4:11 PM >To: stephens@cnet.com >Subject: Re: Maxtor picks Windows, dumps open source > > >So how do I got about rebutting the flat-out lies perpetrated by Mr. >Wilkins in your article, on behalf of the FreeBSD Project? > >FreeBSD has always supported files and disk volumes of 2^63 bytes, far >larger than anything made by Maxtor or supported by the NTFS filesystem. >It provides open-source server software for both AppleTalk and NetWare >file and printer sharing, enterprise backup management from Veritas, >and network managment via the standard SNMP protocol. > >-- > "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" > >Wes Peters <wes@dobox.com> >System Architect >http://www.dobox.com/ > DoBox Inc. > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?001f01c0a61b$fbbbf1a0$1401a8c0>