Instead of freebsd.com, why not...

Anthony Atkielski atkielski.anthony at wanadoo.fr
Sat Feb 12 12:19:56 GMT 2005


Michael C. Shultz writes:

> That was obvious by your confusion with Firefox an opera for example.

What confusion?

Firefox exists only for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux.  All of these
require a GUI to work.  I don't run a GUI on my FreeBSD machine.  The
only browser I have installed on FreeBSD is lynx.

Opera has a wider selection of platforms (including FreeBSD), but it's
still a GUI browser.

> You admit you don't know what is in ports yet feel it is OK to
> say FreeBSD is a poor desktop?

I can say that based on the OS alone.

> Ever heard the saying "better to remain silent and thought a fool....."?

Yes.

> How do you know?  You just admitted you don't use what is in ports...

Because I've checked with the vendors for these products.  They ought to
know.

> Why would you say FreeBSD is a poor desktop when your only desktop
> experience is with windows?

I do have desktop experience with FreeBSD.  I tried it briefly and
abandoned it.  It was so lame compared to Windows that it didn't take
but a day or two to realize that it was a waste of my time.  I don't
have any emotional investment in operating systems, so I just went back
to Windows.

> I don't blame you, when something goes wrong on a Windows system
> the solution is usually to reinstall everything.

No more so than with any other OS.  The main reason I disallow automatic
updates is that I want to know exactly what is being installed on the
machine at all times.

> FreeBSD is a bit more robust than that.

No, it's not.  It's neither better nor worse.  But in a production
environment, you never do any updates automatically, anyway.

> On this point I guess you'll have to take my word
> seeing as you have no experience with FreeBSD as a desktop....

Just as you've taken my word about the number of applications I run
simultaneously on Windows?

> Why do you feel you are qualified to say FreeBSD is a poor desktop
> again?

Because I've used it for that purpose, along with a number of other
operating systems.  Windows wins by a handsome margin.  The closest
competitor is the Mac.  Nothing else is even in the running.

> bullshit

Tell me again about how I should take your word for things.

> bullshit. You are a flat out liar friend.

If you actually used these operating systems, you would know otherwise.

> NTFS frags, and slows down noticeably if you fail to defrag it.

I have not noticed that.

> I'll assume  your line of work is not database related...

I don't currently run database servers.  But database servers have a lot
of issues relating to performance, not just file-system fragmentation.

> I'm sure it does, in your dreams.

This brings back such distant memories!

-- 
Anthony




More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list