Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 30 Mar 2005 06:52:14 +0200
From:      Anthony Atkielski <atkielski.anthony@wanadoo.fr>
To:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Anthony's drive issues.Re: ssh password delay
Message-ID:  <1234296489.20050330065214@wanadoo.fr>
In-Reply-To: <1112143621.661.18.camel@orker.orbweavers.co.uk>
References:  <154613622.20050327112206@wanadoo.fr> <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNAEOLFAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> <4247420E.1030307@makeworld.com> <405056772.20050328020101@wanadoo.fr> <b59dd13095fa4194699ba40fde8f2e36@chrononomicon.com> <1965951106.20050329180958@wanadoo.fr> <a37ff467011f3f0e5f2f1fc80575226b@chrononomicon.com> <91674201.20050329230028@wanadoo.fr> <1112143621.661.18.camel@orker.orbweavers.co.uk>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Martin McCann writes:

> then stop complaining to a list of 'kiddies', and use that.

MS doesn't support FreeBSD.

> If you have never encountered the term FLOSS, you are not the open
> source user you claim to be, it is a common term.

I've probably encountered it, I just didn't retain it.  The IT world is
full of acronyms.

> And what open source developer does anything but 'doing it at a loss'?.

Very few, which is one reason why open source is not a serious
competitor to proprietary software in many cases.

> Statistics will prove whatever you want it to prove, most people with
> intelligence look beyond the given conclusion, and make their own.

If you don't look at statistics to draw your conclusions, what do you
look at?

> Depends on what you want as a desktop - desktop != WIMP.

Most people want a GUI on the desktop, and UNIX isn't designed for that.
There are fundamental conflicts between the design requirements of a
desktop and those of a server.  One cannot do both well.

> Alternatively, many of the features of windows seem to match those of
> already available software.

And so on, and so on.  GUIs on the desktop predate the Mac and Windows
interfaces by many years.

> So what defines a secure system, if not the fact it is less prone
> breakens?

The NCSC criteria are a good start.  Windows NT and its successors
satisfy more of them than UNIX.

-- 
Anthony




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1234296489.20050330065214>