why support alpha??

[Scott Likens]

On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 19:43, eqe at cox.net wrote:
> Isn't alpha dead? Why bother supporting them in 5.2 it seems like wasted
> energy. Yes people still use it but for them there is 4.9 which works
> fine. You could better serve the freebsd community by focusing on the
> future of computing like amd64, great dual support, better drivers, etc.
> and most people know this, so why not let alpha die. I personally like
> alpha but it has no future.
> 
> BTW to all the alpha people don't flame me flame compaq and dec for
> selling it to them!!

Okay i'll feed the troll.

Why support an architecture that is ambivelent as the Alpha? let alone
code for it?

Why should we Code FreeBSD?  Wouldn't our efforts be better used on
Microsoft's side?

Why couldn't we merge Linux and FreeBSD into one whole pile of goop and
reform 'Unix(tm)'.

When it comes to the open source community it's called CS.  We like to
experiment, learn, grow beyond what we see always.

Supporting the Alpha is both a fundamental thing, and an experiment, a
learning process for each and every one.

Just like how coding for FreeBSD teach's us new and unique things, we
learn, we grow beyond what Microsoft wants us to be.

So to answer your question,

Alpha is supported because we want to, we like it, and if you don't like
it then why don't you ask the linux mailing lists the same damned thing.

Because Linux supports 5x the amount of arch's as we do, (not as well I
think).

So go waste your time where it's better trolled.


-- 
"I think we ought to be out there doing what we do best - making large
holes in other people's countries." - George Carlin