Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 17:15:19 +0200 From: Roman Neuhauser <neuhauser@bellavista.cz> To: Peter Christie <christie@idsi.net> Cc: grog@lemis.com, FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What do we need in a FreeBSD desktop? Message-ID: <20020730151519.GA275@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> In-Reply-To: <Infinity Data Systems WebMail-1.0.1-10280361393d46962b92afa@mail.idsi.net> References: <20020729163540.GL73294@freepuppy.bellavista.cz> <Infinity Data Systems WebMail-1.0.1-10280361393d46962b92afa@mail.idsi.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2002 09:35:39 EDT
> From: Peter Christie <christie@idsi.net>
> Subject: Re: What do we need in a FreeBSD desktop?
>
> On 29 Jul 2002 12:36 EDT you wrote:
>
> > > Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 11:21:35 EDT
> > > From: Peter Christie <christie@idsi.net>
> > > Subject: Re: What do we need in a FreeBSD desktop? (was: Peter heads back to M$FT WinBloze [support groups])
> > > To: grog@lemis.com
> > > Cc: FreeBSD-Questions@freebsd.org
> > > for my wife and kids to use? not as it is now . . . it's hard enough
> > > keeping them up and runnning with windoze, and the kids are into games
> >
> > Pardon me, but if it's hard enough for someone to operate windows,
> > why should freebsd try to be *the* os for them? clearly, and it's
> > been said too many times, use a tool you can manage.
>
> I didn't say M$ windoze was hard to operate, I did say it was hard to
> keep them up and running on windoze, with 3D video cards and force
> feedback joysticks and digital cameras and . . . I wouldn't want that
> challenge on a FreeBSD machine at this point in my learning.
aha, so it was my lacking english. sorry.
> > > But the idea here is to set up a "convert" (be it from M$, Mac, or
> > > otherwise) with a 'basic' desktop system that can be up and running
> > > with minimum effort and complications. This would let more people
> > > 'use' FreeBSD as a desktop, and provide feedback for the developers.
> >
> > hm, i'm afraid freebsd is not for the faint of heart. if you're
> > a {windows, mac} convert, you better start learning with a unixlike
> > os aimed at you: redhat, mandrake, suse. *or* you have to get
> > ready to rtfm, rtfm, rtfm.
> >
> > which is what i did. it's not a coincidence i oppose the idea of
> > converting freebsd to another dualbooter's toy. the nature of
> > freebsd has been very attractive to me, and i'm really glad this os
> > is what it is.
> >
>
> I too am glad FreeBSD is what it is, and I utfm as needed ; )
>
> I'm not really suggesting changing the nature of FreeBSD, but I do
> think an easy to install, get up and running, basic desktop
> enviornment would greatly increase its user-base. . . advanced users
> could certainly choose the current stand/sysinstall
>
> as a new user (which I still consider myself) I would certainly
> appreciate someone weeding through the 7000 ports and coming up with
> a basic set of programs which would provide a good starting point from
> which to work.
which is what the greg's instantworkstation port tries to achieve,
right?
> > > FreeBSD will never be a great desktop OS if you don't build a huge
> > > user-base, which will then get you support from manufacturers for
> > > drivers and such, as well as the 'other' software companies for
> > > user-land apps / games.
> >
> > i don't think this holds water, strictly speaking. freebsd already
> > *is* a great desktop os: what is a "great desktop os" lies in the
> > eye of the beholder. i've been using freebsd exclusively
> > since last september. *for me*, it is the best desktop os i've ever
> > used. it supports all the hardware and software i use, with just the
> > right "ease of use".
> >
> > i put the term "ease of use" in quotes, because it's actually
> > something that is in the eye of the beholder, again.
>
> I still think a larger user-base would make hardware and software
> companies provide better support for FreeBSD, which would further
> increase FreeBSD's user-base . . . FreeBSD wasn't written for 'YOU',
> I'm certainly glad you find it useful, but it should be made to appeal
> to as wide an audience as possible.
yes, it's true that the more desktop/home users an os has, the more
likely it is for hw vendors to support the os. but as i said:
freebsd's hw support has been adequate for me, and so i don't see
any reason to compromise this os' quality by making it
point'n'clicky so that it was easy enough for my grandma.
what i'm trying to say is: this os is really fine, its installer is
by far the best of all installers i've seen (it's not perfect
though, i've filed a pr two years ago, and it's still open :)
whenever you encounter something that's too "hard" to do, the
problem is that the procedure is underdocumented. (this is true even
for sendmail(8)*, which i've abandoned in favor of postfix a few days
ago: the wealth of documentation!)
*) sendmail is part of freebsd, and is not at the same time, so i'm
not sure whether this really matters
anyway, this is getting increasingly off topic, so take it to
freebsd-chat@ if you like (i'm not subscribed :)
--
FreeBSD 4.6-STABLE
5:00PM up 37 mins, 4 users, load averages: 0.06, 0.01, 0.00
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020730151519.GA275>