Desktop FreeBSD

Vulpes Velox kitbsdlists at
Mon Mar 8 00:24:53 PST 2004

On Mon, 8 Mar 2004 1:39:52 -0500
<dashevil at> wrote:

> Joe Sixpack becomes fusterated, even angry, when he learns that HIS
> OS is the reason he can't use some program that he wants. He doesn't
> think of it the same way we do though. It's not, "Damn them for not
> supporting multiple platforms!". It is, in fact, "What the ****,
> this OS sucks.". He doesn't understand WHY his nice new OS can't run
> the program he wants. He just knows that if he were to make it so
> his computer could run the program he wants, the only thing he'd
> have to change was his OS. (This is different with Macs as they are
> percieved [by most mac zealots] as being evolutionary technology,
> etc, etc. To any extent, people accept the fact that their computers
> on a whole are different). So, he sees, say, LINUX, as being the
> thing that is coming between HIM and being productive. This is all
> about perception, but it is very important. I cringe when I hear
> about Linux being put on computers and sold in stores. First of all,
> I don't think the customers will be happy with it i
>  n the long run (especially after they buy some software and realize
>  that it won't run on their computer). Second of all, I'm not sure
>  many people who buy these computers fully understand what Linux is,
>  and without that understanding they are getting themselves in
>  somewhat of a jam.

Ppl like this are also a product of a bad education system... ppl like
this will only stop standing in the way of new tech when that is fixed
most likely...

Granted slowly working with them can be useful... but that is not
really a effective solution... the solution with this is going to be
found with time and getting the needed info into the education

> If FreeBSD is to be more appealing to Desktop users (and I mean
> Linux/techy Windows users, not Joe Sixpack. Know your market) we
> should, as opposed to modifying FreeBSD in a way that makes it more
> appealing to a more laid back user, seperate it into two different
> ISO downloads. You have the Server/Classic version, and the Desktop
> version.

Check the arcc, this idea has been proposed a few times all ready =]

I think the biggest problem is lack of time or whatever in the area of
ppl that would go and make it happen... /me happens to be one of those

> The Desktop version would assume more on install, have a graphical
> installer, and let you choose GUI that you want on start (along with
> xdm/kdm/gdm). Possibly even its own theme, which would MAKE a lot
> more of a difference then you would think at first.
> I realize what a lot of you are going to say to this, and I've
> already thought about it a lot.
> We wouldn't have to make our own GUI installer from scratch, what's
> wrong with RedHat's anaconda? Modify it, make it use pkg_add. Bam,
> we're in buisness.

Got a link?

> A lot of work involved in making two images? Not really, the only
> binaries that I envision being different would be (aside from the
> installer) the kernel. Which REALLY should have dummynet and ipfw in
> by default with 'allow all' by default (Only for desktop). Other
> than that, you wouldn't really be adding that much overhead to the
> whole process.

Requires a few other things...
1: A tool with a nice front end to rc.conf, ipfw, and sysctl...
In this area I've slowly been looking at throwing together a little
python script using wxwindows for this for sysctl, ipfw, and ports.

More information about the freebsd-advocacy mailing list