Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2001 20:19:35 +0000 From: setantae <setantae@submonkey.net> To: Anthony Atkielski <anthony@atkielski.com> Cc: questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: home pc use Message-ID: <20011120201935.GB80963@rhadamanth> In-Reply-To: <008f01c171fb$a5108da0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <20011120023948.A92409@xor.obsecurity.org> <00df01c171b0$2a938be0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <20011120105642.GA75918@rhadamanth> <012d01c171b6$96b5adc0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <20011120114236.GA76431@rhadamanth> <005f01c171bf$c4d06b10$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <20011120131850.GA77414@rhadamanth> <001f01c171cf$430e8ac0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <20011120150009.GA78153@rhadamanth> <008f01c171fb$a5108da0$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 08:43:29PM +0100, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > Ceri writes: > > > We are talking about window managers. Window > > managers don't run applications. > > Yes. That's why an X environment on UNIX that looks and feels like Windows is > still useless--because looking like Windows doesn't mean able to execute Windows > applications. I refute your assumption that a system that doesn't run Windows applications is useless. > > It's perfectly possible to run applications > > such as Netscape without a window manager. > > There is a command-line version of Netscape??? Where? There you go again. Window Managers Do Not Run Applications. All you need is an X server to run Netscape. > > Yes, and you never heard of them, therefore > > your statement (which I include below, since > > you snipped it) make no sense. > > Sure it does. All operating systems look very much the same after you've seen a > few of them. There are only so many overall architectures that make any sense > for an operating system. No, it doesn't. You said that as long as you have some idea with some Unix like system then the concepts map across. Generally, that is indeed true, but you don't seem to have much experience of Unix like systems, let alone FreeBSD. > > I evaluated your competence with FreeBSD. > > Nothing more. > > Yes, that is obvious. Then why suggest that I was calling into doubt your general IT competence ? > > You were stating that a gui environment on FreeBSD > > is no more stable than Windows, when you only have > > three weeks experience with one window manager on > > FreeBSD. > > The stability of a GUI is independent of the OS over which it executes. You have only tried one, yet you condemn them all. > > I thought you were looking for a window manager > > that doesn't crash. > > I was actually looking for an X server that would run on Windows, so that I > could have a graphic environment for my UNIX interaction from Windows that > would be similar to the native Windows environment. If you say so, but I could have sworn you actually said : ``Which alternatives provide both the stability of the native CLI mode (which is, after all, a major selling point for FreeBSD) and the functional and ergonomic equivalent of Microsoft Windows?'' > > If you want useful information, ask a question > > and don't make statements. > > More precisely: Ask a question and take whatever you are told as gospel. You aren't asking questions, you're making ill-informed statements. Ceri -- keep a mild groove on To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011120201935.GB80963>