Date: Fri, 26 Mar 1999 07:09:47 -0700 From: Donald Wilde <dwilde1@thuntek.net> To: dyson@iquest.net Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Development Projects (was:Re: FreeBSD emulation for linux) Message-ID: <36FB952B.2E5E7F3C@thuntek.net> References: <199903261028.FAA00745@y.dyson.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John S. Dyson wrote: > [snip earlier thread and co-listeners, everybody but BG is on -advo] > > > Slightly off topic: > FreeBSD isn't even able to run current NetBSD binaries (last time > I checked.) Since FreeBSD and NetBSD are brothers (and not just > cousins), one would think that FreeBSD would be able to keep up there. > > If Linux takes some odd directions in the future (which wouldn't surprise > me), it is doubtful (with the current organization) that FreeBSD will keep > up. The new, farther sighted marketing will tend to help give feedback > to the core team and other developers, but such feedback has previously > been errant or missing. > > It would be good to petition the -core team to listen to the marketing > person, and not poo-poo him as others have been (both rightfully and > wrongly.) It is easy to poo-poo ideas after it becomes a habit to do > so. It is time for OPEN minds. PMFJI, I heard my title mentioned. I spent a few hours listening to our local users [including Alan Lundin of Sandia, a real power user] at our FUUNM meeting last night. Our core users -- server users -- need NFS to work right. Alan would also like true multiprocessor threads a la Enterprise 450, but he'll settle for NFS not hanging up the network. He also said the two projects might be related? He also acknowledged that FBSD NFS is the BEST Open Source NFS, but if it doesn't work perfectly it debunks our stability claim to a large portion of the MIS market who would love to be our friends. We cannot afford to lock an NFS network. PERIOD. Other comments (from the more desktop-oriented) were that shrinkwrap suites are critical to their being able to sell FreeBSD into the corporate networks. I agree with this. I think the Applix port (as opposed to XOffice, which I understand is really 'heavy' on resource usage) is a critical watershed in terms of the desktop. Java server and JDK native support is #3. A full-featured browser and modern mail client is #4, one that doesn't hang when the ppp is not connected. MPHO is that Netscape is not likely to give us that, since AOL has hogtied and is now shredding them. Mozilla is a better choice in the long run, I think. Also, Mutt just doesn't cut it in the desktop world used to Eudora and Netscape mail readers. If we can accomplish _just_ these four things with our code-project resources, plus get a native Oracle 8 port, I think they would give us a big boost in unit installs. Can I announce the solutions next week? ;-) -- Donald Wilde "Bringing the Internet to everyone!" Wilde Media 1380 Rio Rancho Blvd. SE #117 voice: 505-771-0709 Rio Rancho, New Mexico 87124 e-mail: dwilde1@thuntek.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36FB952B.2E5E7F3C>