Date: Sun, 22 Sep 1996 00:04:13 -0600 (MDT) From: Brandon Gillespie <brandon@glacier.cold.org> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: splash-page on bootup.. Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.960921234950.14645B-100000@glacier.cold.org> In-Reply-To: <XFMail.960921234721.durham@w2xo.pgh.pa.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 21 Sep 1996, Jim Durham wrote: > Amen... can you imagine what would happen if the system didn't > boot? No boot...no reading var/log/messages to see what happened.. Uhrm, it was nestled at the end of a paragraph, but I figured it would work like 95 where a simply hitting 'tab' or something similar would toggle the two windows. > IMHO setting up the root window in X to some neat FreeBSD graphic > would be just fine to impress the masses. > > Is it really a viable objection that probe messages are construed as > flakey operation? I always thought the probe messages were the sign > of "gee..this is a real operating system". As is my opinion, unfortunately many of the people who may agree are not in a position to decide which OS goes on a server. Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com>: > A system that looks and feels professional to me is a system that does > not hide every aspect of what the hell it is doing from me. *nod* and I agree; but often those making decisions have no idea about the true nature of the OS, just how many warm fuzzies it gives them. > Microsoft Windows 95 is unprofessional. It is slick in many ways... but > just try to get it to do what you want, when you really know you want to > do what it doesn't want to let you do. Its rather irrelevant, if the owner feels better about 95 (or more appropriately NT) because it feels safer--he will use NT and thats the end of discussion. My point is to try and make it easier for non-FreeBSD (read: Microsoft Junkies) to accept it as an alternative, great! What I think would work best for this is a simple kernel option: options SPLASH_PAGE ## make the microsoft junkies feel good Which would be in kernel.GENERIC but which is easilly removed by anybody who cares with a simple recompile. *shrug* Its just a thought afterall ;) Paul DuBois <dubois@primate.wisc.edu>: > Uh, what? I'm not MS fan, but the majority of free software for the > platform is virus-infected? No, that is simply a common opinion in that crowd--I work with people who use NT and 95 daily (and whos primary involvement with 'unix' is through some aromatic SCO product), its a nightmare trying to convince them that Free does not mean 'virus-infected and shitty'. Enjoy; -Brandon Gillespie
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.91.960921234950.14645B-100000>