Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 04:35:04 +0100 From: Anthony Atkielski <atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr> To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SPAM: Score 3.7: Re: Instead of freebsd. com, why not... Message-ID: <1843923725.20050218043504@wanadoo.fr> In-Reply-To: <20050217123248.E42152@knight.ixsystems.net> References: <9C4E897FB284BF4DBC9C0DC42FB34617641B03@mvaexch01.acuson.com> <128456842.20050217185105@wanadoo.fr> <2810734464.20050217192707@wanadoo.fr> <20050217123730.O79252@makeworld.com> <224383192.20050217213351@wanadoo.fr> <20050217123248.E42152@knight.ixsystems.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Matt Olander writes: > FreeBSD and others make for an excellent desktop operating system once a few kinks > have been worked out. Apple and Microsoft make excellent desktop operating systems that work exactly as-is. Conversely, Apple and Microsoft make excellent server operating systems, once a few kinks have been worked out. FreeBSD makes an excellent server operating system that works as-is. Do you see the difference? > There are many examples of large organizations replacing Windows with an > opensource operating system for their desktop deployments. There are also many examples of companies trying to do so and then giving up and going back to Windows, usually because they feel for the hype but didn't investigate enough before making the attempt. -- Anthony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1843923725.20050218043504>