Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 28 Mar 2009 15:49:48 +0000
From:      Frank Shute <frank@shute.org.uk>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: installing freebsd on windows
Message-ID:  <20090328154948.GA96077@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20090328083932.6d2ad3d3@scorpio>
References:  <20090325041118.5c99710a.freebsd@edvax.de> <49C9A572.3070006@gwi.net> <20090325045911.56efaff6.freebsd@edvax.de> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0903251125200.31143@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <49CC1230.8060005@onetel.com> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0903270103090.47997@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20090327115040.GA88708@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> <20090327083131.59204048@scorpio> <20090327144533.GA89056@melon.esperance-linux.co.uk> <20090328083932.6d2ad3d3@scorpio>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Sat, Mar 28, 2009 at 08:39:32AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
>
> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 14:45:33 +0000
> Frank Shute <frank@shute.org.uk> wrote:
> 
> >On Fri, Mar 27, 2009 at 08:31:31AM -0400, Jerry wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, 27 Mar 2009 11:50:40 +0000
> >> Frank Shute <frank@shute.org.uk> 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.
> 
> A system can never be over powered.
> 
> >> >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?
> 
> Virtual desktops. What are you referring to? Visit the power toys URL
> for further information.
> 
> http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/Downloads/powertoys/Xppowertoys.mspx

Thanks for that. Did they use to be called PowerTools? I downloaded
them a few years ago but it didn't come with virtual desktops. 

> 
> >Why do I have to Google the info? Shouldn't there be a copy of the
> >info locally?
> 
> Not necessarily. Many people don't want to clutter up their system with
> documentation that they will never use. I certainly don't. If I
> actually need an obscure bit of information, I can always obtain it.

And when your 'net connection is down, then you can obtain it?

I maintain the Handbook locally. It's no effort and can save my bacon
for whenever I don't have 'net access.

> 
> >I can google for unbroken filemanagers, documented shells, install
> >cygwin etc. but the software as it stands is horribly inadequate and
> >undocumented.
> 
> In your opinion. I never have a problem finding what I am looking for.
> 
> >> MS Windows is probably the best documented piece of software around. 
> >
> >Are you being sarcastic?
> >
> >Where's the Handbook like FreeBSDs?
> 
> Are you being sarcastic?

No.

> 
> >You can read the source can you? I can't.
> 
> If you are referring to the source code; well that is obvious. If
> something else, then what? People get paid to develop the software. If
> they gave it away, they would not make a living, the unemployment lines
> would swell, and crime would increase. Now, if you don't believe in a
> capitalistic system of free enterprise, please come over and paint my
> house this weekend. I promise not to insult you by offering to pay you.

You've fallen hook, line & sinker for the broken windows fallacy.

I support free software with a subscription to TUG. It's not my job to
keep software developers in employment though.

> 
> >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.
> 
> Yes, it is fragmented. The simple fact that there is so much information
> is the cause, not the problem.

It maybe the cause but it's also a problem. There should be one page
on microsoft.com for each of their OSes where one can start looking
for info.

For instance, I did a search for "cmd.exe commands" on Google and it
didn't return a useful page from microsoft.com on the first page.
That's weak. What's even weaker is that cmd.exe isn't described in any
of the local documentation on Vista/XP.

> 
> >> 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.
> >
> >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.
> 
> Did you actually install the 'Power Shell?' I assume that is what you
> are talking about. Read the 'Getting Started" pages. I just installed
> it and there is a wealth of information there. Certainly enough to get
> started with.

I was talking about cmd.exe. That's the shell on Windows isn't it?

I thought Powershell shipped with my version of Vista (business) but I
guess I was wrong.

> 
> BTW, many people consider 'man' to be an acronym for "Much About
> Nothing". Therein lies the reason that O'Reilly has make a fortune
> distributing 'How-To' books.

I own a shelf full of O'Reilly books. If I get my softs for free, I
don't mind paying for extra documentation.

When I pay for software, I expect it to be thoroughly documented ( la
AutoCAD with a big thick manual).

> 
> >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.
> 
> Wrong, you are looking for a specific OS that is tailored to your very
> specific specification. Everyone does not (thank GOD) have the same
> criteria. If it suits you, then great. If not, find one that does.
> Bitching like an old wash woman accomplishes nothing.

I told you what constitutes my idea of some of the things that a
proper OS consists of. Contrary to your assertion, that does not
constitute "bitching like an old wash woman" you clod.

FYI, I've found an OS that works for me.

> 
> >Extensive documentation on the machine is a must.
> 
> Then install it. Everyone does not want massive amounts of useless
> clutter.

That's your problem. You see documentation as clutter, I see it as
essential.

> 
> >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.
> 
> Obviously, you have not installed the shell. Besides the info included
> with the program, you might want to check out the following URL. It
> should answer most of your immediate questions. I also question you
> 'search' ability. I don't seem to be having any problem finding
> gratuitous amounts of documentation.
> 
> http://support.microsoft.com/kb/926139

User guide in rtf and docs in txt. Laughable.

They've obviously put so much effort into documenting it </sarcasm>

> 
> >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. 
> 
> Yes, it is commonly referred to as a 'learning curve' Personally,
> anyone who cannot handle a Win32 machine has serous problems. Six year
> old kids gleefully manipulate a PC without problems. I know several 7 &
> 8 year old kids running MS Office without any difficulty at all. It all
> depends on how motivated you are.

Can they manipulate their files & dirs with the Vista file manager?

Nobody's pointed out docs for the aforesaid file manager yet.

> 
> Conversely, I know many individuals who just plain gave up tying to run
> a *.nix system because they could not get a device to work, or locate a
> driver, or find a support mechanism that was suitable for them
> purposes. Things like FLASH have always been problematic on FreeBSD.
> 
> >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.
> 
> If you are happy with something, then why bitch. You sound like an old
> lady.

That's the second time you've accused me of bitching like an old
woman.

Top tip: If you can't write without throwing in ad hominems don't
write at all.

<snip guff> 

Now run along and play with Windows since it's the "best documented"
OS in the world. Have fun & spend lots of money to keep those poor
developers employed & stop the capitalist system from falling down!

-- 

 Frank 


 Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html 




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090328154948.GA96077>