Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 17:40:52 -0400 From: dennis <dennis@etinc.com> To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> Cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), jkh@time.cdrom.com, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Price of FreeBSD (was On Holy Wars...) Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970418174048.00af4084@etinc.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 03:29 PM 4/18/97 -0600, Nate Williams wrote: >> The commercial organizations I've dealt with (and in) must schedule >> for "minimal feature set", "expected feature set", and then "stretch >> goals" over and above that. > >Then the organizations you dealt with are *very* different than the >organizations I've dealt with. I've found that the FreeBSD 'release >engineering/software engineering' cycle is orders of magnitudes better >than REAL (tm) companies I've worked for and with. > >> If they told you it was supposed to be fixed in the next product, and >> then it wasn't, you'd scream blue murder. > >Happens more often than not in my experience. The behavior of the bug >has changed, but the bug still exists. Bugs are a different banana...we're talking about major features... You decide between Window 95 and NT by understanding what the product can do and what is expected to be available in the foreseeable future. If you had to reinstall the thing every 3 months there'd be a lot of people using something else db
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3.0.32.19970418174048.00af4084>