Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 21:40:13 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: jkh@zippy.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, scrappy@hub.org, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: From Slashdot... Message-ID: <199902012140.OAA24850@usr06.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <80474.917843727@zippy.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Jan 31, 99 08:35:27 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > The people I'm aware of who use FreeBSD as a serious desktop are > > using KDE. It complies with open standards, and has the disctinct > > This in no way explains the failure of XiG to market CDE to the > FreeBSD market whereas it had a success with the Linux market. > > Remember how this topic started, please understand: The issue wasn't > KDE vs CDE vs GNOME vs TWM and 3 sexy icons masquerading as a desktop, > the topic was commercial ISVs showing some "faith" in the FreeBSD > desktop market through sales experience. When you sell 3 copies of > something that sells thousands of copies elsewhere, this does not lead > to faith and that was the ONLY reason I brought up CDE at all - I have > zero interest in getting into a debate about its technical merits or > lack thereof since that wasn't the point in the first place. Well, I never heard that there was a CDE for FreeBSD, and even if I had, the a.out/ELF change was imminent for so long that I would only have bought an ELF version. Even so, I don't plan on doing a hell of a lot of Motif developement, which is why I would have bought it, plus I have my own Motif clone code that I really don't want them to claim that I've seen a real Motif, namelisted the libraries, or examined the header files (the reason I unsubscribed from the "Lesstif" list early on is that they were engaged in technically illegal reverse engineering practices). But that's just me. > > I think the desktop contest went down so badly because it was a > > phenomenally uninteresting thing to hack on. I personnaly didn't > > get involved because of the politics of layered software in FreeBSD; > > The ports collection has over 2000 items in it now. Arguing that this > approach was somehow infeasible doesn't really make sense in that > context given the sheer number of people who have clearly gotten their > heads around the concept enough to contribute new ports/packages. Really? How do I replace sendmail with a different SMTP agent without having to do anything to a configuration file? > > technology needed to layer software; for a desktop, this is a > > System V style rc structure. It's just not worthwhile working on > > I don't agree that desktops fundamentally require a SysV rc structure. > That's like arguing that SCO would run faster if the box it came in > was a different color - a non-sequitur at best. It doesn't -- but only if you don't give the people the choice to not install it. > > You might want to rehold the contest, if you can promise that the > > winner's code will go on the CDROM as something other than a port, > > I seriously and honestly doubt that this would make the slightest > difference. I know you don't agree, but I simply haven't seen any > real evidence to lend weight to the above assertion. Well, then, there's no risk if you do it... 8-). > > so that is not the problem. Rather, xBSD does not have > > the fbdev driver system and the next release of KGI is > > not done yet. If these problems can be fixed (not by me), > > all of this should work on xBSD as well. > > Why not by you? "If not you, who else?" :-) I was quoting the guy who was hired by creative labs in the URL that was sent around. That wasn't me saying "not me". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. 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?199902012140.OAA24850>