Reason #465132 to Love FBSD....

[Martin Tournoy]

Kernel from 1999 or 2001, what's the diffrence? Both old...
Thats the thing with any version of windows, it's already outdated even  
before it's released...

Why no FreeBSD? I set up a freebsd box for my brother, using fluxbox and  
xfce4-panel, and a few "easy" applications (openoffice, xfe, firefox, gaim  
ect.) and he has no trouble using it, even though he's a "computer idiot"  
(well actually, he's an idiot, perdiod, hehe)

freebsd is actually easyer then windows, it's a bit harder to setup for  
the avarage user, but once set up by someone who knows his stuff, it's  
really easy to use...


On Tue, 16 May 2006 16:07:51 -0000, Kevin Kinsey <kdk at daleco.biz> wrote:

> Martin Tournoy wrote:
>> Use windows 2000, works better and faster than XP anyway, has all the  
>> features XP has, except the teletubby UI, but that's not a feature but  
>> the work of the anti-christ...
>> No troubles with updating, or nagscreens
>
>
> Heh, I've a Thinkpad T23 with Win2K on it, though it really
> ought to be used for FreeBSD as well --- however, wifey doesn't
> see it that way just yet.  Maybe if I get her a shiny new
> DELL (*ack, cough, *hack*, sniff, wheeze).
>
> As for "no troubles with updating", that's all relative.  If
> I were using a BSD kernel from 1999, nobody would talk to me
> around here ;-).  I also appreciate FreeBSD's rich built-in
> utility set, and dislike entering my passcode twice to switch
> users in W2K (which, incidentally, isn't necessary on XP,
> feature, bug, what have you....).
>
>
> KDK
>