Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 04:36:24 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr> To: Anthony Atkielski <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> Cc: FreeBSD Advocacy <freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: FreeBSD on the desktop (was: TheRegister article on Hotmail) Message-ID: <20021123023624.GA97416@gothmog.gr> In-Reply-To: <014201c29296$f9cc4a20$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <20021121161453.GA69019_submonkey.net@ns.sol.net> <008501c2917a$ac643080$0a00000a_atkielski.com@ns.sol.net> <200211221502.gAMF2a6a089963@catflap.bishopston.net> <20021122234047.GB60785@wantadilla.lemis.com> <014201c29296$f9cc4a20$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2002-11-23 03:21, Anthony Atkielski <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> wrote: > Greg writes: > > Agreed 100%. I've had to use Microsoft from > > time to time, but for my purposes it's a toy > > compared to FreeBSD. It would take me several > > times as long to get things done if I had to > > use Microsoft. The contortions through which you had to go to quote the above text (and then manually rewrap it to such a short line width), are really not necesary when you use better tools than Outlook Express for mail. I'm writing this reply using Emacs, which wraps and refills the paragraphs as I type, to the width that I have configured it to do. I still don't know of a way that Outlook Express can be forced to wrap text *and* display it correctly in line shorted than 70 columns. This probably seem irrelevant at first, but if you read it in context of what Greg has pointed out above, you'll notice that a point is made. Doing exactly the same thing (write a page of text with lines shorter than 70 characters) is a ton of work in Outlook, and a pair of keypresses away in a Unix tool. > Part of rational advocacy is recognizing the strengths AND the > weaknesses of one's favored OS. UNIX is a usually a poor choice for > the desktop, and Windows is often a poor choice for a server. You are not following your own suggestion. Why are you presenting only the weaknesses (or at least, a rough outline of the weaknesses) of these two environments and never mention any of their strengths? > It's important for objective parties to remain wary of anyone who > claims that a single operating system can do everything better than > any other OS. Then one that needs to compare Windows to UNIX would have to do a comparison of a great number of operating systems. "Windows" is a family of operating systems, and UNIX is an even greater family. Are you suggesting that you know everything about all of them when you are implying that Unix is not good as a desktopo and Windows is not good as a server? :P 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?20021123023624.GA97416>