From owner-freebsd-newbies Tue Aug 3 9:13:50 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-newbies@freebsd.org Received: from palrel3.hp.com (palrel3.hp.com [156.153.255.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9D0F152B3 for ; Tue, 3 Aug 1999 09:13:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from MICHAEL_HEITMEIER@HP-Germany-om12.om.hp.com) Received: from isoit644.bbn.hp.com (root@isoit644.bbn.hp.com [15.136.88.78]) by palrel3.hp.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.5tis) with ESMTP id JAA07069; Tue, 3 Aug 1999 09:12:47 -0700 (PDT) From: MICHAEL_HEITMEIER@HP-Germany-om12.om.hp.com Received: from localhost (root@localhost) by isoit644.bbn.hp.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.6 TIS Openmail) with SMTP id SAA26567; Tue, 3 Aug 1999 18:12:43 +0200 (METDST) X-OpenMail-Hops: 1 Date: Tue, 3 Aug 1999 18:12:29 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: RE: basic info on freebsd needed... MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FreeBSD-Newbies@FreeBSD.ORG, mpoulin@honk.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; name="BDY.TXT" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="BDY.TXT" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > I think that anyone considering tackling the desktop OS market > would do well to examine this installation procedure. Based on my experience a) most users are spoiled by Windows and b) FreeBSD could be made more user friendly. The two work together very powerfully: people who are used to not having to configure anything in detail (like me :-) have a hell of a time to dig through the many many config files and parameters that produce a truly tuned system. In all honesty: I'll never do that simply because I don't have the time or the inclination to become a Unix guru. What most Unix people (this is by no means limited to FreeBSD) seem to don't understand is that a Computer is in 99% of all cases a solution to a problem, not a problem in itself. So on the one hand I am still amazed that the generic kernel simply boots without further ado (try that under Windows!!), even if you change the motherboard or NIC while on the other hand I am equally amazed that apparently 'tuning the kernel' is 'one of the chores every Unix administrator has to endure'. Wait a minute, administrator? This is where the system serving people who HAVE to have the detailed knowledge meets the masses of people who only want to click on things and use the computer as a tool. Please spare me from the arrogant comments that 'knowing how to use a mouse does not mean knowing how to use a computer'. So what? Do you have to know what factors influence the quality of the ignition spark in order to drive a car? Some people do, others just get from A to B. In my perception (reading tons of mails and posts) it's mostly an attitude problem: the people who develop FreeBSD are technical wizards and gods and what ever else. Agreed. The people at Microsoft are marketing wizards, right? They produce something the masses want: colourful, clickable programmes and never mind what's under the hood. As usual the truth is somewhere in the middle: there has to be room for users to grow. The innards of the OS and programmes should be available to people who feel inclined to fiddle, hack, improve etc. At the same time, the innards should not be pushed in the users face as is the case with FreeBSD. Of course, everybody has a choice: FREEbsd in another sense: I don't have to put myself through the ordeal, I can just shell out K$ for NT. Never mind if that solves the users problem, that's not the point. The point is one of direction: while everybody seems to agree that FreeBSD is the most stable OS that money can buy (pardon the pun) where is it headed? To return to the last post: Does anybody really even consider 'tackling the desktop OS market'? Sorry to come back to MS again but their strength is obviously not so much on the technical side but in their single minded drive to capture market share and make a ton of money. This is only possible if MANY people use their products which in turn means they have to be simple to use. User friendliness therefore is not a 'nice to have' but critical to their strategy. So, where does that leave FreeBSD? I don't know if there even is an explicitly stated direction, let alone what it is. What I know for sure is that the more time it takes and the more complex the system is to set up and use the less appeal it has for an average computer user. The server niche FreeBSD has will be around for a few years but if it does not come out of the corner and moves to the desktop then it will become a curiosity just like the bloke down the street who manages to squeeze 1% more horse power out of his engine and in the end also just drives from A to B. Yes I enjoy the ease of use of Windows and yes I also enjoy the stability of FreeBSD and the freedom it gives me to configure things. Now can I have both please? Michael To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message