Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 27 Mar 2009 10:09:52 -0600
From:      Tim Judd <>
To:        Frank Shute <>,
Subject:   Re: installing freebsd on windows
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <20090327083131.59204048@scorpio> <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Frank Shute <> wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 08:31:31AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 11:50:40 +0000
> > Frank Shute <> wrote:
> >
> > >On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 01:03:59AM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >It's certainly not slow and messy here. I installed PCBSD a couple
> > >> >of months ago after a few years of rolling my own desktop and I
> > >> >love it. On reasonable spec hardware it runs very well, the
> > >> >developers have done an excellent job
> > >>
> > >> of course. windows vista runs well too on overmuscled hardware.
> > >
> > >No it doesn't. It doesn't run well on any hardware because it's got
> > >things like a file manager that is broken for all intents and
> > >purposes. No virtual desktops, undocumented shell etc.
> >
> > Actually, it supports at least four that I know of. You can Google for
> > the information.
> Four of what?
> Why do I have to Google the info? Shouldn't there be a copy of the
> info locally?

Want to download the Internet?  Ok, as soon as 5 minutes pass from the
download, your copy is old.

> I can google for unbroken filemanagers, documented shells, install
> cygwin etc. but the software as it stands is horribly inadequate and
> undocumented.
> > MS Windows is probably the best documented piece of software around.

I can see that perception.  Depends on where you look though.  Limiting
yourself to one source (google) or another (MSDN) isn't wise, because google
will give you real-world experience and help, whereas MSDN is documented as
it SHOULD operate and RECOMMENDED practices.

> Are you being sarcastic?

I'm not.

> Where's the Handbook like FreeBSDs?

Write one, publish it.

> You can read the source can you? I can't.
> Maybe I'm just getting old but Vista documentation seems to be
> scattered to hell and west over the 'net - if you can find what you're
> looking for at all.

Because not a single admin works the same as the next.  People with Windows
mindset will work in one way, people with Linux mindset will work another,
and people with OS X mindset will work in a 3rd way, all

> > What is it you are looking for?
> Where are the documents for using their crappy filemanager? There are
> some with what they call, exaggeratingly, their help system but they
> are useless compared to any unix documentation. Probably there are a
> limited number of ways you can describe such an excrescance as the
> Vista Explorer replacement.

Useless insults aside, there is a difference in the help systems for the
desktop systems, versus the server systems.  2008 is a good mix, although
it's not unix.

OS X 10.5, Leopard is certified unix, and still doesn't feel as natural (or
useful) as BSD or Linux does.  If you want to know why, let me know.

> Where are the manpages for their shell? They should at least have some
> documentation that comes with the OS that lists and describes the
> commands it supports. It doesn't.

manpages aren't an Internet thing.  It's not an RFC standard.

MS Windows has command line help, you use /? that works for most apps.

cmd /?

> I'm looking for an OS with a sane file hierarchy and a shell I can use
> to manage the files therein. An editor better than Notepad would be a
> bonus too.

I see the sense in C:\Users
I see the sense in C:\Documents and Settings
I see the sense in C:\WINDOWS
I see the sense in using CMD.exe -- after all, the dos box has been around

An editor better than Notepad?  MS Write.  And then MS Office/Word, then
OpenOffice.  Somewhere there's Abiwrite.  Of all these 5, only one is
commercial software.

> Extensive documentation on the machine is a must.

Nope.  That's a personal belief, one that isn't a "must".  You're imagining
things on that.

> I've searched on google for documentation on the powershell to no
> avail. All the docs as such seem to be available if you are a member
> of MSDN - I presume so anyway, but for the general public they don't
> seem to be readily available.

PowerShell is still "new"..  If you want documentation, MS Press makes a
windows 2008 resource kit including a book called 'Windows PowerShell
Scripting Guide' that's over 600 pages.

Not all resources have to be google-able.  Spend a few bucks and buy
something that'll help you... it'll benefit you too.

> In short, I gave Vista a decent shot (I quite like XP) but it was like
> wading through treacle and I thought that if I am to get the best out
> of it, I'm probably going to have to sign up for MSDN and download
> vast amounts of "missing" software and spend inordinate amounts of
> time on google.

Books.  Or get something like a Safari Books Online subscription and then
start reading the info online... same books, online.  Save a tree.

> The cost and time benefits didn't seem worth it since I'm quite happy
> with FreeBSD and there's only one Windows only application that I use:
> AutoCAD; for that I maintain an XP installation.

> Staying on topic, my advice to the original poster is to dump Windows
> and use FreeBSD - it's better documented and you can either use WINE
> to run your "must have" Windows programs or have a separate Windows
> partition. With a bit of luck your Windows "must haves" will eventually
> have unix replacements.

On-topic?  HAH!  You went off the deep end.  And Wine doesn't work for when
you need NT Services and/or dependencies (such as .NET) -- at least, didn't
for me.

And I am flaming you, personally.  I understood lots of this was personal
views and I offered my personal views as well.

So fan the flame if you want.  I've said my peice and now you can ignore me
if you'd like.


Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>