Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 08:00:42 -0400 From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: RE: [Q] How stable is FreeBSD 3.X ? Message-ID: <4.1.19990525075210.0465a180@granite.sentex.ca> In-Reply-To: <000001bea672$dce52580$021d85d1@whenever.youwant.to> References: <199905250541.WAA00380@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 01:53 AM 5/25/99 , David Schwartz wrote: > > Have you stopped to consider that users may just want to _use_ FreeBSD >without having to follow the development? Have you considered that bad >releases affect them? This is yet another piece of the 'Open Source' versus >'company supported' puzzle. NT out of the box needs to be patched for performance and security reasons. No matter what OS you deploy, you must follow the development so to speak... Even if only for security reasons. Yes, it would be nice in a perfect world if this were not the case. ---Mike ********************************************************************** Mike Tancsa, Network Admin * mike@sentex.net Sentex Communications Corp, * http://www.sentex.net/mike Cambridge, Ontario * 01.519.651.3400 Canada * 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?4.1.19990525075210.0465a180>