Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 22:01:27 -0500 From: "Oliver, Michael W." <oliver.michael@gargantuan.com> To: 'Anthony Atkielski' <anthony@atkielski.com> Cc: FreeBSD Question List <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Tiny starter configuration for FreeBSD Message-ID: <1DA741CA6767A144BAA4F10012536C27A8E4@LKLDDC01.GARGANTUAN.COM>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
What I meant was to retire the hardware that you have WINNT running on now for use with FreeBSD, as it can do wonders with equipment that Windows can sometimes struggle with, and then reinstall Windows on your new, faster hardware. Also, I totally agree with you that any flavor of *NIX to date can't really match the multimedia rich experience (and ease) of Windows, at least what I have seen. I also realize that this statement can (and probably will) cause me to incur much flaming email, but I don't much care about that. Opinions are like a$$holes, and I have stated mine. With that all said, I personally can't wait for the day when *NIX catches up to Windows in the desktop space, especially in regards to hardware compatibility. I have yet to purchase a piece of hardware that Windows wouldn't run with, while I cannot say the same for FreeBSD. THIS IS NOT A COMPLAINT! Just a fact. I don't expect FreeBSD to be this versatile (yet) without the army of developers (and marketing pukes) that Microsoft has. Like automobiles, there is no single, perfect vehicle for speed (sports car), economy (compact car), utility (SUV), or power (diesel dually). Computer operating systems are no different, and anyone who struggles trying to make a very powerful server OS (like FreeBSD) be a just as powerful interactive, multimedia, flashy OS (Windows) is taking on an unnecessary burden. The same can be said for spending endless hours applying patches to IIS to make is as secure as Apache is right out of the box. And, I wouldn't even consider building an IPv6 firewall on Windows, which was suprisingly simple on FreeBSD. Work smart, not hard. Time is of the essence. If I were a software developer, and had the smarts, I would certainly do everything that I could to make FreeBSD, which I am gaining more respect for each and every day, a formidible competitor with Windows on the desktop. Alas, I am more of a network nerd than a software guy. We each have our strengths, no? I will now dip into my flame retardent suit.... =========== Michael Oliver > -----Original Message----- > From: Anthony Atkielski [mailto:anthony@atkielski.com] > Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 5:53 PM > To: questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Tiny starter configuration for FreeBSD > > > Michael writes: > > > I have a suggestion for you, though! If you are > > just contemplating your first BSD/UNIX system, why > > not get an evaluation copy of VMWARE and run > > FreeBSD within a VM on your WINNT system? > > The Windows NT system is a mission-critical production system > for me, so I don't want to do anything to it that might > destabilize it, and that includes installing or changing > anything that isn't absolutely mandatory. I'd rather get a > completely separate machine, with no connection to Windows or > my production machine at all, and install a pristine copy of > FreeBSD on that. The only link between the two will be via > the Ethernet hub (or rather switch) that I bought today. > With 100 Mbps cards in both machines, it should be easy to > transfer files quickly from one to the other, I should think. > To simplify things, I plan to just use something like FTP. > I'm not going to try to make either machine "aware" of the > other in the usual file-sharing sense (that would require > undoing a lot of security tweaks I made to Windows NT, anyway). > > > That is what I did from the start, and you have > > the advantage of being at the console of both your > > Windoze and BSD system without getting out of > > the chair. > > I plan to put the machines more or less on either side of me > at my desk, so I should be able to access either of them by > just turning slightly in my chair. > > > If you find that you really like it, then get > > dedicated hardware for it, or retire your current > > Windoze hardware for use with FreeBSD and get the new hardware for > > WINNT/2k/XP (God knows that they need it...). > > I already like FreeBSD, as I run my Web site on it. But the > Web site is on rented server space, and I want to have a > system of mine own that I can fool with freely, and that > presents no risk to production (even if I had unrestricted > access to the one running my Web site, I obviously couldn't > afford to play around with it, since it is handling all my > site traffic and e-mail). > > As for retiring Windows, that isn't likely to be an option > for the foreseeable future. While UNIX is undeniably useful > in server environments and other utility domains, it can't > hold a candle to Windows on the desktop. And of the hundred > or so applications that I use regularly on Windows, the great > majority do not exist on any other platform, so Windows is > the only option. Actually, Windows NT is an extremely stable > and well designed OS, so it's not too bad. (I'd never risk my > production on any of the inferior Windows systems, like 95, > 98, ME, etc.) But with Microsoft bringing out a completely > new OS each year, I'm just tired of being expected to chuck > everything and upgrade every few months. A FreeBSD system > could easily run for a decade with no changes at all. > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > 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?1DA741CA6767A144BAA4F10012536C27A8E4>