From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 13 04:21:36 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D536016A4CF for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:21:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from hobbiton.shire.net (hobbiton.shire.net [166.70.252.250]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB02943D4C for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:21:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from chad@shire.net) Received: from [67.161.222.227] (helo=[192.168.99.68]) by hobbiton.shire.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.43) id 1D0BGI-0007zd-AE for freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 21:21:34 -0700 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619) In-Reply-To: <863830644.20050213025358@wanadoo.fr> References: <20050212203851.D694116A4D3@hub.freebsd.org> <1108249638.32574.49.camel@zappa.Chelsea-Ct.Org> <863830644.20050213025358@wanadoo.fr> Message-Id: From: Chad Leigh -- Shire.Net LLC Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 21:21:33 -0700 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 67.161.222.227 X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: chad@shire.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.0 (2004-09-13) on hobbiton.shire.net X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50 autolearn=disabled version=3.0.0 X-Spam-Level: X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.1+cvs (built Mon, 23 Aug 2004 08:44:05 -0700) X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on hobbiton.shire.net) Subject: Re: Instead of freebsd.com, why not... X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 04:21:37 -0000 On Feb 12, 2005, at 6:53 PM, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Paul Mather writes: > >> I hate to burst your bubble, but neither is any other OS vendor >> ultimately accountable for its code. > > Actually it is. That's why companies tend to prefer support from > vendors; vendors have a vested interest in making good on support > requests, because they can lose a lot more than just a support contract > if they fail to do so. > >> By that, I mean you can file "problem reports" or "trouble tickets" or >> whatever the phrase du jour is, but the company is ultimately under no >> obligation to fix them. > > Vendors can fix problems; third-party support companies cannot. ????? Maybe companies who support MS or other proprietary software can't as they don't have the source. But support companies that support open source can very easily fix problems -- they have the source and the license to use it Chad