Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2003 08:18:39 +1000 From: David Gerard <fun@thingy.apana.org.au> To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Selling FreeBSD Message-ID: <20030606221839.GO31266@thingy.apana.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20030606090819.GY49662@iconoplex.co.uk> References: <3EDF3C08.DAC649AD@jhcs.co.uk> <20030605131640.GS49662@iconoplex.co.uk> <20030605164812.GC6086@survey.codeburst.net> <20030606090819.GY49662@iconoplex.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Paul Robinson (paul@iconoplex.co.uk) [030606 19:09]: > If they aren't enthusiastic, it's because it's not solving any problems for > them. The fact it works great as a high-traffic MX or HTTP server isn't > something most businesses need. As for desktop use, well, it does suck > compared to something like Mandrake for an average run-of-the-mill office > worker. Even Mandrake sucks a little bit compared to Windows XP these days. I would question that. I just set my highly non-technical wife up with FreeBSD 4.8, KDE 3.1, Mozilla Firebird 0.6 (Linux binary) and OpenOffice.org 1.0.3 (Linux binary, as mentioned on this list ;-). It does require an administrator to at least run the ports or packages, but any office network will need an administrator. The only thing still missing is a drop-in replacement for Outlook. Other than that, it's probably more usable than Windows, and a Windows user should have no trouble. "It works like Windows, but it doesn't crash!" - d.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030606221839.GO31266>