Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 20:13:44 -0600 From: David Kelly <dkelly@HiWAAY.net> To: FreeBSD_Questions FreeBSD_Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Freebsd vs. linux Message-ID: <77803d5ce17805187218b4cdfb6cc83d@HiWAAY.net> In-Reply-To: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNOEGIFAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNOEGIFAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 14, 2005, at 3:48 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > The main difference between a desktop and a server is a server > needs beefy disk I/O or beefy CPU power or both, while a desktop > needs beefy video and can often make due with piss-poor disk I/O. No, the main difference between a server and a desktop is that many people are counting on the server to function without error while only one person is inconvenienced when the desktop fails. Servers get better hardware because its a cost savings for the server to be more reliable and the added performance helps more users. Servers should also have the most reliable software but that is where Microsoft cuts corners for additional profit and provide employment for MSCE's whom otherwise would not be needed. There is no reason a server should not have a GUI so long as it does not detract from the server's function. Use of a GUI to "dumb-down" the system doesn't work as Microsoft has shown. Apple is smart enough to pull it off, but all Microsoft has done is continue to guarantee employment for MSCE's who continue to exclusively recommend any and everything Microsoft who in turn continually ensures these champions stay employed. -- David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@HiWAAY.net ======================================================================== Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?77803d5ce17805187218b4cdfb6cc83d>