From owner-freebsd-advocacy Thu Dec 20 13:57:28 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mail12.speakeasy.net (mail12.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.212]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F3F337B419 for ; Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:57:16 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 21971 invoked from network); 20 Dec 2001 21:57:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO laptop.baldwin.cx) ([64.81.54.73]) (envelope-sender ) by mail12.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 20 Dec 2001 21:57:15 -0000 Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.4.0 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <024601c1899f$365d63e0$0a00000a@atkielski.com> Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2001 13:56:58 -0800 (PST) From: John Baldwin To: Anthony Atkielski Subject: Re: Microsoft Advocacy? Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.org, Gilbert Gong , Jeremiah Gowdy Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 20-Dec-01 Anthony Atkielski wrote: > John writes: > >> I think desktop OS is misnomer. UI and OS are >> two separate things, regardless of how much MS >> ties the two together. > > That is true in a strict sense, but today, no ordinary computer user would > tolerate a desktop without a GUI. If someone really wants a CLI-based > desktop, then UNIX suddenly becomes the OS of choice, as Windows can't even > begin to support that sort of environment, whereas UNIX was born for it. > > It has also occurred to me that blind users might find UNIX to be a very > friendly OS. They don't really need or want a GUI, and everything that UNIX > can do can usually be done with plain text. > >> And you have said that you think FreeBSD is not >> a viable desktop for specific circumstances. >> That is equivalent to it not being valid for >> _any_ circumstance. > > According to what logic? Some said (rough paraphrase): FreeBSD is suitable for use as a desktop for specific circumstances. This is equivalent to: FreeBSD is suitable for use as a desktop for at least one circumstance. Jeremiah replied with: "I do not agree." Which is equivalent to: FreeBSD is not suitable for use as a desktop for at least one circumstance. Which is equivalent to: FreeBSD is not suitable for use as a desktop for any circumstance. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message