BigApache for Windows - Why doesn't BSD have an installer package like this ???

[Vulpes Velox]

On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 07:28:17 -0700 (PDT)
DK <asdzxc111 at yahoo.com> wrote:

> .. I know its hard for people to swallow, but MS Windows IS easier
> to use than BSD/Linux/OSX ... thats WHY its the most widely used....
> regardless of marketing/costs etc ...

Depends on what you mean easy to use... if you by easy you mean lack
of proper file manipulation tools, no easy to use package or ports
system, search tools, easy to swap out window manager, and ect I guess
so.

> Gnome starts faster than Windows ?? Start time is not important - I
> am talking about reaction time of the GUI - Menu's apearing, moving
> icons, applications appearing etc - Working with Fedora at Uni(Yes,
> I am doing a Masters) the other day, its on a 50 Node Cluster - Its
> running on systems faster than what I have at home(above), yet feels
> like its as gluggy as Windows 95! - nice one Linux

Gnome does more than windows.

BTW the speed in that case can most likely not be attributed to linux.
Most likely it is not running with the defualt gnome settings and in
some cases even safe or sane settings for compile options.
 
> As for XFCE, how do you start it from the .xinitrc
> The XFCE Homepage site says "exec startxfce4" - but that didn't work
> for me ??

Works here.

> Whats the purpose of having to manually set the system to automount
> ?? as opposed to having it as a system install default ?? if there
> is an advantage, I am sure its for the 0.01% of the user base
 
Yes, it is a default installs should under no circumstances decide
what users want to do with there systems.

If you want to create a second freebsd distros that includes amd
running and configed by defualt, feel free to.

I personally find it rather bloody nice, rather than having to deal
with some stupid program guessing where I want it mount.

It is bloody annoying in multiuser enviroments.
 
> > > - 300 Million Users of Windows thinks so ;)) (BTW: I am NOT
> > > including KDE/GNOME)
> > 
> > Windows has a larger user base, that's correct.
> > > 
> > > - No default Find Files GUI - I won't even comment on lack of
> > > functionality of Cmd line whereis/search/find
> > 
> > In gnome there is a find option that enables you to find files.
> > And then 
> >   there is find, which can do a lot more then you probably think
> >   now.
> 
> 
> - sorry, I wasn't clear above - For the lack of a GUI Find Files
> option, I meant the default install or with Window Managers(wmaker),
> not the Desktop Environments like KDE/Gnome(which are also fast...
> NOT) - which I don't use as they are slow

Guis to find files exist. Check the ports.

/me has one hotkeyed to mod4+f

BTW you are aware that the defualt configs for KDE and Gnome suck? If
you want to complain about them, you have the wrong list.

> > > I can tell you that 95% of people who use computers want "EASE
> > > of USE"- This INCLUDES easy installation of the Operating System
> > 
> > Following the handbook makes FreeBSD installable by nearly anyone.
> 
> 
> - installable YES, configurable ... you've got to be shitting me :o

Once you find a editor it like, it is exteremely.
 
> - install BSD+wmaker(easy)
> - start the GUI - oops some doc reading here(easy+1)
> - while in wmaker, dynamically change the Montior settings from
> 1600x1200 32b to 1028x768 24b(wouldn't have a clue - off to the docs
> - manually edit configuration files ?? - then restart - but what is
> the correct horizontal frequency OR vertical refresh(hard++) - I
> don't know & I don't want to know(hey while I am at it, why don't I
> start designing my own CPU)... that's why people use Windows(easy to
> configure)

I have all ways found windows harder to configure. Requires to much
muching about and shoe horning it into areas it was never meant to go,
just to get a bit of usability in.

> I played with BSD back in 1997 & thought it needed some work.. so I
> gave it a miss.. Fast Forward to 2004, & all I see are developers
> adding features that are not that important, yet missing the basics
> of what the majority of USER's want(not coders) Apple OSX
> understands this(nice GUI over BSD base - shame about the stupid
> high prices & dumb one button mouse)... sorry BSD/Linux developers
> ...your just giving more air to MS by focusing on the wrong things

You do realize the difference between a bleeding OS and a bloody WM
and that they are both completely seperate?

If you want to talk about missing basics, talk about windows, which
still to this day does not have a proper CLI, windowing system, and
still regards telnet as good do to inept developers and managamnet.
There are a horde of tools and the like it is completely and uderly
missing.

> ...XPde seem to have the right idea... looks promising... hope the
> GUI reaction time is fast http://www.xpde.com/

And agian, under X11, the gui is totally seperate from the OS.

Don't see what is really so special about it yet, given it docs and
the like.

> that reminds me of my Java Lecturer(I hate Java BTW) in which every
> time students had a problem, he would never look at the code but
> just reply "check out the java docs.. its all in there" ... yea
> right..

Ask better question or drop the class...

Same here, ask proper question, learn, and get farther.

BTW nothing about computers is intuitive. Any one telling you
different is lieing to you and is trying to manipulate you into doing
something for them, which most likely runs agianst your interest.

> > You should not shout that much, that's bad for your heart. FreeBSD
> > has features that enable you to pick what you want as X-client
> > (window manager), follow the handbook..
> 
> ... heart... I had it replaced with the plastic one installed
> yesterday... it was conflicting with BSD !!

Huh? Plastic?

> > > I cannot tell you the shock & disappointment I had in finding
> > > out that Windows 2000 runs
> > FASTER
> > > than FreeBSD with any GUI/Windows Manager/Desktop Environment
> > > ... :(((
> > 
> > Opinions, again i dont agree, and if you do find this i suggest
> > you have some benchmarks with what applications run faster, etc.
> > Since then you made a good point with some proof.
> 
> 
> Benchmarks - How about FreeBSD+wmaker(GUI) & Windows 2000 installed
> on EXACTLY the same box Any person standing next to me could see
> which is faster Windows 2000 GUI - Much faster than Wmaker
> Loading/Using Notepad/Wordpad - Much faster than Nedit
> Windows Explorer - Heaps faster than xfe

Never had any problem what so ever blowing windows out of the water
with FreeBSD. Even using just package and no compiling. If you want to
blame something, blame your Xclient or WM setup. Which is most likely
your problem, not FreeBSD.
 
> maybe you would like a test of the Apache Web Server on BSD against
> the Apache Web Server on Windows 2000 ?? - I will search the net &
> get back to you on that if you are interested ??

Get to same speced computers or just one... install both... and
test... there are packages for that in the ports.

> I wonder if people that run web servers on BSD never use a GUI
> thereby saying how fast BSD is...- yes, keep using VI & don't forget
> to feed the Horse :)

Or x/emacs...

No need for X on a server.

> > > ...damn I have gone way off track here... sorry for the ranting
> > > people... but after 6 days straight of messing around trying to
> > > install Apache/MySQL/Mod_Perl/Mod_SSL/PHP.. I am a little
> > > tired... 3 days of that was trying to get a basic GUI/File
> > > Manager/Find Files/Editor working
> > 
> > You perhaps should have asked, search, or rtfm before giving
> > yourself a heart beat of 160...
> 
> All I have been doing till 4am every morning is reading/searching
> :((

Some times it is best to hold off a bit and then try agian. The same
is true for Windows and every other OS when you find a problem.


> ... but if BSD's performance is related to being able to turn off
> services & close ports, I can do that in windows - with an nice
> GUI(albeit not with the same level of manual tuning / tradeoff for
> all the other nice things that windows offers)

I can assure you it's performace is not becuase of any of that stuff.
It is becuase of a good fs and ect. No FAT derived crap.

> If BSD's better performance is due to System Admins running Web
> Servers but doing so without the GUI(???)... then you maybe right
> Remko, BSD may not be right for me.- In the year 2004, I refuse to
> spend my time coding in front of a screen hacking in "cmd line
> syntax".. hey thats just me!

See previous ;)

But any ways, there are a lot of tweakable options under freebsd that
very easy to access. Far easier than looking for obscure info on how
to do it in windows using regedit.

man sysctl


Simply put, use what ever bloody works for you... if you don't like
unix, fine, just don't start telling others how they should work,
like, or what should be good enough for them ;)