Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 13:59:23 +0200 From: Giorgos Keramidas <charon@labs.gr> To: Anthony Atkielski <anthony@freebie.atkielski.com> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Feeding the Troll (Was: freebsd as a desktop ?) Message-ID: <20011129115922.GA75539@hades.hell.gr> In-Reply-To: <016301c17888$c1be3cc0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> References: <15365.11290.211107.464324@guru.mired.org> <006101c17854$c6aa2570$0a00000a@atkielski.com> <01112817112006.13219@prime.vsservices.com> <016301c17888$c1be3cc0$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 2001-11-29 04:48:41, Anthony Atkielski wrote: > > > Please point those parts of the Windows architecture that make is > > superior as a desktop system. > > See above. The lack of a multiuser environment is usually an advantage as well, Why? > > Again, outside of more applications, please tell me how MS Windows > > is a better desktop platform at the architectural level than > > FreeBSD. > > I already have, several times. But even if I had not, having more > applications is already _more than enough_ to make it a better > choice. "More applications" for what definition of "more" and "applications" ? > This is a very bad sign, as it means that the X server is not > secure. No wonder it crashes the system. For what definition of "secure"? It needs to do stuff to the system console, that the kernel of the OS does not know (or does not care about). This seems to be modular, but insecure? -giorgos To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011129115922.GA75539>