Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 17:18:26 -0400 From: Francisco Reyes <lists@stringsutils.com> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: Marc =?ISO-8859-1?B?Ry4=?= Fournier <scrappy@hub.org>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Are hardware vendors starting to bail on FreeBSD ... ? Message-ID: <cone.1151529506.438442.61382.1000@zoraida.natserv.net> References: <20060622174220.AEB6D44696@mx1.FreeBSD.org> <20060622145130.I1114@ganymede.hub.org> <cone.1151484180.608204.14057.5001@35st-server.simplicato.com> <000801c69aa9$71f65f40$3c01a8c0@coolf89ea26645>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ted Mittelstaedt writes: > You have no guarentee that any piece of hardware you buy will be > supported on any future revision of FreeBSD, or even Windows > for that matter. True. > I have lots of Intel gear in my basement that was > supported on various Windows versions in the past, which cannot > run today's Windows. Your being unrealistic. I am aware of their test drives. What doesn't seem "realistic" to me is that a vendor that dedicates the resources to have a test drive environment will not say that FreeBSD is "unoficially supported". If they didn't have the test drive and they were completely uninvolved with FreeBSD I would have no issue. It is the fact that they are involved with FreeBSD yet when asked about it, they don't simply state what is.. it is not officially supported, but we have the test drive.. and we have people working it in some way shape or form.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?cone.1151529506.438442.61382.1000>