Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 07:06:26 -0800 From: "David C. Jenner" <djenner@halcyon.com> To: Keith Woodman <keith@lightningweb.com> Cc: Jacques Vidrine <n@nectar.com>, chris@tci.com, mmercer@ipass.net, jkh@zippy.cdrom.com, me@T-F-I.freeserve.co.uk, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Confusion Message-ID: <36F267F2.627CC555@halcyon.com> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.990318230049.3551A-100000@nefertiti.lightningweb.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This guy is absolutely correct. The designations RELEASE, STABLE, and CURRENT, what they mean, and the targeted audience of each are exceedingly confusing. You (FreeBSD experts who intimately know what you are doing) are cooking your own goose. If it's your goal to have your own, private enclave of FreeBSD users, you're doing great. If you want to spread the good word, you're shouting into a paper bag. Dave Keith Woodman wrote: > > Last post from me on the issue. > I started this thread in this list as a mistake. I followed up with saying > I was sorry and agreed this should be in -chat. > I think the fact that this thing is still alive after a couple days > suggests that maybe the team should consider the fact that with the > growing influence of Linux and other OS's. Maybe, just maybe a reminder is > needed to them that in the end, this is a consumer product and the people > at the head of it should think more in that way instead of thinking of it > as being a hackers only OS. If the consumers aren't considered in their > opinions but instead told the age old. "Read the .TXT, RTFM," etc etc. > The team will in time be developing a OS for themself and nobody else. > All the potential new comers will have been scared away with > RTFM, etc. Not to say that is a bad thing. I agree with RTFM. But I think > maybe some people involved have lost sight of the needs of the average > consumer of an OS. We're not hackers, admins, or networking gods. We don't > cvsup a few times a week or track different branches we simply want an > OS that is not forced upon us such as MS. I would hate to > think that FreeBSD has taken the 180 on MS and actualy scared folks away > by simply naming the RELEASE, STABLE, CURRENT, in a manor that is not > intuitive for most people. Then slaming them when they question the > reasoning or ask for a clear explaination of why it is like it is. > "It clearly says in the release notes for 3.0 that it's for developers". > That's the kind of thing that is obviously misguided, out of touch and > flat out narrow in focus in regards to marketing a product. I don't want > to sound like a sniffler but. Anyone off the street that want's to test > out FreeBSD and see's the name RELEASE on it should be confident that it's > not "For developers". When finding out differntly. They'll go to a system > that they can understand. Linux, MAC, MS etc. Keeping in mind that most > people aren't going to do ftp installs, cvsup a few times a week or even > get a new version on a regular basis. > Unix type systems have branched out to the consumer market in a > way like never before. Linux developers have taken notice of the need for > a "marketable approach" to increasing the user base. I think FreeBSD > should stand up and take notes to this approach. And, make things a bit > more standard in the consumers point of view. 10 million some odd users of > linux and growing more and more daily. There is something to be said for > noticing the needs of more than just the developers, hackers, admins and > guru's of other sorts. Targeting those users is fine, just so long as you > don't care to expand the user base to a large degree beyond that. > Now, I say a second time. This is best left for > -chat -newbies I would think.. > If at any point I sound ticked off, snid, or otherwise rude. It is a wrong > impression on your part. I had no such intentions or thoughts while typing > this. And yes I do understand that this list is NOT about marketing. But > it becomes that when people are having utter confusion with the naming > of the current version they are running, and ask a simple question like > my original post. Sorry so long winded. Crak it up to being a > FreeBSD newbie/lamer. > Good day. > Keith > > On Thu, 18 Mar 1999, Jacques Vidrine wrote: > > > This thread was originally about consumers, and I don't wish > > to comment on this market. This posting, however, goes into > > other waters... > > > > On 18 March 1999 at 21:35, chris@tci.com wrote: > > [snip] > > > I have to agree. I've recently been fairly successfully in getting the > > > NT admins where I work to to at least dip their toes in this stuff > > > (Linux/FreeBSD). > > [snip] > > > In the Winders world > > > (and, I would venture to say, in most others) the more recent version > > > of Product X is always preferred over the older alternative. > > > > This last sentence is simply not true in the real world, especially > > with regard to ``.0'' releases. IT professionals know this. > > > > Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / nectar@FreeBSD.org > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36F267F2.627CC555>