Date: Wed, 4 Aug 1999 09:18:52 +0100 From: "Peter McGarvey" <Networks.Manager@rncm.ac.uk> To: "Doug" <Doug@gorean.org> Cc: "Greg Lehey" <grog@lemis.com>, "David Kudrav" <dkudrav@eng.ua.edu>, <freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG>, <kudra001@bama.ua.edu> Subject: RE: basic info on freebsd needed... Message-ID: <NDBBJLAJELEHNLGABIJNEEBDCCAA.Networks.Manager@rncm.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <37A70DB1.E3784E60@gorean.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
...Major Snippage.... > For out of the box configuration FreeBSD is basically > a server OS, linux is more of a desktop OS. Therefore > your experience is not altogether unexpected. Also, if > you had known where to look you could have had X and > kde set up just as quickly as linux set up enlightenment > for you. In fact, you probably could have had enlightenment > set up just as fast, but I don't know for sure because > I use kde and don't have any experience with the other > wm ports. > > All that being said, the OOB is important, and freebsd tools > tend to be written for people who already know the system. > Then again, that's true of most unices that I've worked with. > Is one or the other more "intuitive?" I'm not in a position > to judge that, but you can't say that the tools aren't there > for freebsd because they are. The only matter of contention is > how they are presented. I'm aware that FreeBSD is a server OS - and it's a bloody good one too. I've been using it for over a year. Of course I've had problems. But I've usually solved these problem fairly easily and in the process learned quite a lot. I'm quite happy with the tools that come with FreeBSD and would actually sugest that they are intuitive if you know what you are doing. Indeed, I've recently replaced an NT server with a FreeBSD partly because I couldn't cope with the poor performance/stability but mainly because the idiotically intuitive and long winded GUI make simple jobs take an age. I only looked at Linux for two reasons. Firstly I wanted to see what it was like. And second, I wanted to try out Oracle as god intended before trying to get the FreeBSD Linux emulator to do it. However, once I'd seen X on Linux I decided that the time had come to try to get the exact same look and feel with FreeBSD - and possibly find a replacement for my crappy ol' Win98 desktop. Call me a train spotter but if I see something I like I invariably try to get FreeBSD to do it. I'd proved that FreeBSD could do everything I needed Windows NT for (well almost everything). So don't see why I can't aim for Linux (and possibly Win98). If you ask me user friendlyness looks good to corporate marketing types - but when it comes down to it, most techies want something that will do whatever they want. BTW, you may be interested in this article which compares several different flavours of unix - including FreeBSD. http://www.techwebuk.com/story/TUK19990726S0029 TTFN, FNORD -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=- Peter McGarvey, Networks Manager | email: Networks.Manager@rncm.ac.uk Royal Northern College of Music | tel: +44 (0)161 907 5218 124 Oxford Road, Manchester, | fax: +44 (0)161 273 7611 England M13 9RD | mobile: +44 (0)7887 990564 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -=- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?NDBBJLAJELEHNLGABIJNEEBDCCAA.Networks.Manager>