SPAM: Score 3.3: Re: Instead of, why not...

Robert Marella hoe-waa at
Fri Feb 11 19:58:13 PST 2005

On Sat, 2005-02-12 at 04:34 +0100, Matthias Buelow wrote:
> Robert Marella wrote:
> >>MacOS X is the "Desktop BSD".  It is available today, and it works 
> >>better than anything else at being a "desktop".  
> > Does it work on my intel hardware?
> And your point is..?
> mkb.
 Market share!

What percentage of the desktops are intel/AMD based? If MacOS X is _THE_
Desktop BSD, can it be ported/converted to the majority of the installed
desktops? If not, can someone/some_company/some_group do to intel/AMD
desktops what Apple did to MacOS X?

I know the driving force of FreeBSD is toward servers. Apple was able to
make it a desktop OS. I like it as a desktop OS on my intel hardware but
I have a lot of time to spend. Even with the time, I still can't get
everything to work as I would like. 

If it was a better desktop OS more people would notice it and would
recognize the name FreeBSD. 

When I tell most people that I do not use MS Windows, I get a blank look
and then they ask what I do use. I usually say I use a form of UNIX
called FreeBSD. The first thing out of their mouth is, "Oh, Linux!".

I then go on to tell them about FreeBSD as their eyes glaze over.

That's my point!


More information about the freebsd-advocacy mailing list