Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2001 13:22:55 -0500 From: "Andrew C. Hornback" <achornback@worldnet.att.net> To: "FreeBSD Questions" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Re[2]: Tiny starter configuration for FreeBSD Message-ID: <00e601c16302$3a03da60$6600000a@columbia> In-Reply-To: <00b601c162d2$107df930$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG]On Behalf Of Anthony > Atkielski > Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2001 7:38 AM > To: FreeBSD Questions > Subject: Re: Re[2]: Tiny starter configuration for FreeBSD > > > > X is certainly required for Netscape and based > > on the recent bitching on this list about it I > > think that quite a lot of FreeBSD users must > > be running it. > > Netscape or X, you mean? > > I tried Frontier Technologies' SuperX server on my Windows box. > It works well, > I guess, but I haven't found much use for it, as the only > applications I've seen > to try with it are xterm, xeyes, and xclock (and xterm looks just like my > SecureCRT SSH session, only worse). It certainly doesn't seem to > be worth the > $250 or so that they want for the package. Now those are three majorly useful application you've tried right there... > I also tried MicroImages' very inexpensive X Server, but it > faults as soon as I > try to open any kind of session in the X desktop, so that's out. Imagine that, a program for Windows faulting when you try it... must be that terrible "Unix" machine you're trying to connect it to. > At the moment, I'm not sure that I see the value to having an X > Server at all. > What are people running under X that makes it so much more useful > than a plain > tty interface? Hmm... maybe the same reasons that you get a GUI with Windows? Naw, that couldn't be it. > > yes, Sun has not only paid whatever fee that > > TOG is demanding, they have also met TOG's > > requirements for branding. (last I checked one > > of the requirements was for licensed Java to be > > in the UNIX system, thus as you see TOG has > > requirements for UNIX branding that cannot be > > met by any open source UNIX) > > I looked at their site, and it has that desperate, highly > legalistic look of an > organization that is trying very hard to justify its existence > (and fees). The > UNIX (tm) 95 and UNIX (tm) 98 specifications, in particular, > remind me strongly > of another large organization that likes to come out with new > stuff every few > months in order to generate revenue. Aren't those the same folks that like to use two letters to designate new versions now? > It might a losing battle, though, as I tend to think of UNIX as a > generic term, > and I doubt that I'm alone in this. Does anyone remember when > Aspirin was a > defensible registered trademark of Bayer, or Xerox a registered > trademark of the > corporation of the same name? You're rehashing a conversation we had last month. It's not required to go back over something so off-topic. --- Andy 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?00e601c16302$3a03da60$6600000a>