From owner-freebsd-questions Fri Sep 13 17:37:58 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83D9E37B400 for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 17:37:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ncsmtp02.ogw.rr.com (ncsmtp02.ogw.rr.com [24.93.67.83]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E7343E4A for ; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 17:37:49 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bts@fake.com) Received: from mail4.nc.rr.com (fe4 [24.93.67.51]) by ncsmtp02.ogw.rr.com (8.12.5/8.12.2) with ESMTP id g8E0cGup004565; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 20:38:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from this.is.fake.com ([24.162.238.30]) by mail4.nc.rr.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.5.1877.757.75); Fri, 13 Sep 2002 20:37:46 -0400 Received: by this.is.fake.com (Postfix, from userid 111) id 24DF5BA16; Fri, 13 Sep 2002 20:37:40 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: "Brian T. Schellenberger" To: "Anthony Atkielski" , "FreeBSD Questions" Subject: Re: Windows as opposed to Other OS's Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2002 20:37:40 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.4.2 References: <20020911035308.GA90385@peitho.fxp.org> <200209130754.49828.bts@babbleon.org> <007901c25b4d$6f55f970$0a00000a@atkielski.com> In-Reply-To: <007901c25b4d$6f55f970$0a00000a@atkielski.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-Id: <200209132037.40608.bts@babbleon.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Friday 13 September 2002 01:46 pm, Anthony Atkielski wrote: | > In my opinion, as a server, FreeBSD is a great | > choice. It is fast, reliable, and very well | > built. But as a desktop choice, it leaves a | > little to be desired. | | I agree. FreeBSD makes a much better server than Windows NT/2000, | much easier to use, much less hardware required, runs longer without | problems and has fewer bugs (and it's free too!). However, I would | not run any flavor of UNIX on the desktop. I tried that for a short | time and it was a joke. Clearly, people who run UNIX on the desktop | have little else to do but play with their computers; I could never | afford to dedicate that much time to just getting a system to work. Trying it for a short time was no doubt the problem. Getting X initially configured can be a pain, though it has greatly improved, but once you have it set up it stays set up better and requires less fiddling than Windows in my experience. I will say that the "mount" semantics (requiring that you mount the CD and/or floppy) *are* a real pain for the desktop. But other than that, at this point, I'd say it's superior. The lack of programs, especially games, is the only drawback I can see, and I don't happen to play games, so that's no loss. -- Brian, the man from Babble-On . . . . bts@babbleon.org (personal) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message