51

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

KernelPanicked wrote:

what the heck is Labview?

Labview is a National Instruments product.  It is *the* standard program used for laboratory real-time data acquisition and control (including image and video capture).  It is also used on scales larger than the laboratory -- pilot plants and production facilities -- but its home is in the lab and in QA/QC.  You could say it is the MS Word in this field.

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

>You are spot on, BSD is for the server and unix-developers, nobody is hiding that.

@lobster, Tell this someone one the FreeBSD MLs and the will "bash you to death".

>Is bitching about a system news?

Is using it, advocating it and building something like DesktopBSD bitching nowadays? Bewildering times ...

>The definition of professional is taken from askoxford.com


What should the BSDs do? As I've said several times in the last five years, that depends on what the projects want. But if we want to be seen as a viable alternative for use by non-developers, my big issue is that we need to understand the end user perspective. We can't just say of any feature

Last edited by Oliver (2007-03-24 17:34:08)

F!XMBR

Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. --Pericles

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

What I find most interesting about this thread is the wide range of views.  KP wants a server--I'm with him.  DrJ would like something to handle his MS-centric,but necesary to work, apps, I'm with him too.

Oliver is working on DesktopBSD, an effort to make it a viable choice for the end user.   

All of these are valid issues.  KP's fears (which I share) Drj's wishes (which I also share--like it or not, unless you're more elite than I'll ever be you probably have to spend some time supporting Windows, so you need access to some of the programs--to walk users through the menus if nothing else.)

Hopefully, we'll never fragment the way Linux has.  If you learn FreeBSD well, it's a moderately small adjustment moving to Net or Open.  If you learn RH really well, you have to learn a whole new set of things for Gentoo.  (I remember someone saying that they gave up on Gentoo because they felt they were spending all their time learning about Gentoo and none of it learning about Linux.)

As for me--like KP, I don't want to see it get overloaded--I'd rather see Desktop and/or PCBSD do that.

Conversely, it would be nice for Just Works (TM) flash, java, a binary for OpenOffice and binary upgrades that work as well as ArchLinux's do most of the time, regardless of whether I'm running CURRENT, STABLE or RELEASE.  (Colin Percival's freebsd-update still only works for RELEASE).

So, my wishes, to add to my first post here, about seamless binary upgrades would also be to echo Drj's wish for a truly good MS emulator.  (And a Mac one while I'm at it, my wife, of course, is my most demanding user.  "No wonder we have no money.  You do computers for a living and you can't fix this problem"  Stupid Mac.  smile

Qemu is adequate for my needs, (though probably not DrJ's which are far more demanding.)  However, in almost every company there will be one or two mission critical apps that require MS, or at best, Mac. 

For my users, OpenOffice might actually be a viable alternative, save for the lack of Outlook.  Many of them swear Outlook is  the best till they break it.

However, very few of them are Word or Excel meisters, and only need basic document and spreadsheet functionality.  As Drj has said, like it or not, Office is the de facto standard. 

I do find it interesting that even MS, supposedly the O/S for the masses, finds it necessary to have so many different versions of Vista.  We can scoff and say, oh, just a way for them to make more money, but it's also a realization that as computer use has increased so drastically, the needs of different groups have also gone many different ways.

<@andre> i would be so much more efficient if i wasn't so stupid

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

That's right, it's not the need for a FreeBSD full of senseless stuff at a DVD, but it would be nice seeing something like ArchLinux. A flavour like DesktopBSD wouldn't be necessary with a proper binary package-management a la pacman or apt-get (maybe NetBSD pkgsrc). Whereas pacman in my opinion is easier to maintain in terms of building new packages. I'm using Fluxbox, Mutt (some years ago elm wink) etc. but my wife would kill me, she likes e.g. KDE - but compiling it or updating (with ccache too) is a heavy task. So you need something pre-build like DesktopBSD or PCBSD.

Mere end-users could be tomorrows kernel developers - so don't mess with the offspring wink

We don't need a babel of "FreeBSD distros" but the 80s are the past wink

Look at this example,

http://blogs.ittoolbox.com/unix/bsd/arc … ebsd-14564

HAM Radio is of course very special, but it's nice to see it in FreeBSD because you'll see some new users too. The more users, the bigger the community and last not least this will culminate in much more interest of big companies.

Scrotto, where is the danger for your precious server os? You have the false impression of DesktopBSD, it's just a preinstalled FreeBSD with KDE and DesktopBSD tools. The latter is an interface for the ports and provides some tools like battery management for laptops etc. Nothing special but an "entry-level FreeBSD" for beginners without loosing the original approach. And PCBSD? PCBSD tries to implement easy binary updates, updating KDE is something to burn your time. Almost 17.000 ports don't kill your "server os" too?

Where would be Linux e.g. without Ubuntu, Suse etc.? I don't like these distros, but they are necessary for a healthy userbase. And you do need distros like Debian, Gentoo, Slackware or smaller ones like ArchLinux too. It's the variety which builds up a healthy userbase. And I don't see FreeBSD in danger, because it has a base system - Linux is only a kernel, so they are eager doing something alike, namely LSB. If you don't have a common denominator a babel of systems is very likely.
*BSD forks are something different and it's possible that some systems like PCBSD will be a fork in future, if FreeBSD isn't able to gain some momentum toward user-friendliness. And user-friendliness doesn't automatically culminate in bloatware - it's somewhat of a tightrope walk.

F!XMBR

Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. --Pericles

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

I think your last sentence does an excellent job of summing up what I took far too many words to say--it is a tightrope. I'm sure that you guys (meaning the DesktopBSD team) probably spend a good deal of effort figuring out what to add in and what to leave out of it.

It's not a simple, cut and dried answer.  There are a variety of different needs--look at us here on this forum, and we're all from similar backgrounds in that we're comfortable with the command line.   I'm sure that on the DesktopBSD forums, you see even more diversity.

<@andre> i would be so much more efficient if i wasn't so stupid

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

Oliver wrote:

*BSD forks are something different and it's possible that some systems like PCBSD will be a fork in future, if FreeBSD isn't able to gain some momentum toward user-friendliness. And user-friendliness doesn't automatically culminate in bloatware - it's somewhat of a tightrope walk.

And that is exactly where my issue with all this user-friendly nonsense lies. It's just fine to have PC-BSD and DesktopBSD out there doing their own thing to help the clueless, but now you're expecting FreeBSD to change and go that direction as well. FreeBSD (or any of the big 4 BSDs for that matter) was not designed for these people, and if it's forced to get all user-friendly you do so at the risk of alienating a lot of the people who brought it to where it is in the first place.

... and then they said "I bet you can't make MINIX kernel panic!!!" And that's when I got mad

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

>but now you're expecting FreeBSD to change and go that direction as well.

Please don't mistake your FUD with something I said.

>and if it's forced to get all user-friendly

Did you actually read the postings or are you just assuming something. The latter seems obvious to me.

-Wine e.g. will not kill your precious master system for ascetics
-some webcam drivers for example will not interfere your lonesomeness
-a multimedia framework will not kill you succeeding in computing-enlightenment

Really you didn't get anything of the above sayings. I do know some people in computer science department which would be happy about some multimedia framework or some more appropriate technologies in FreeBSD. Because they need it for work, not for gaming pleasure. Do you actually know ArchLinux? Maybe you don't, you wouldn't answer with such a fearful nonsense at all.

>FreeBSD (or any of the big 4 BSDs for that matter) was not designed for these people

"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."

- Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943

Your credo?

Thanks god I do know some BSD developers with an open mind. So nothing is lost ... come to #bsdcert and tell this some people, they would be scared of such ideas wink

Zen at your website?

"When you reach the top, keep climbing"

*BSD can do it and it would be dead without people which keep climbing.

Cheers,

Oliver

Last edited by Oliver (2007-03-25 09:17:29)

F!XMBR

Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. --Pericles

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

Oliver wrote:

>but now you're expecting FreeBSD to change and go that direction as well.

Please don't mistake your FUD with something I said.

1. Please leave the FUD accusations over at slashdot where they belong.
2. I didn't assume anything. As you can see on my last post, I quoted you.
3. This is a friendly forum. I'm not going to bother responding to the rest of your nonsense as this is not the place for getting into petty flame wars.

Last edited by KernelPanicked (2007-03-25 09:40:18)

... and then they said "I bet you can't make MINIX kernel panic!!!" And that's when I got mad

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

>And user-friendliness doesn't automatically culminate in bloatware

If you're quoting, I would thank if you're actually reading the other postings which lead to this saying, without it it's nonsense. The rest you call nonsense is the explanation of some things which I call user-friendliness.

>This is a friendly forum.

Okay I'm sorry for my somewhat harsh words, but ignoring most of the sayings and concentrating on the mere culmination isn't something I call friendly too - it's disrespectful in a discussion.

>I didn't assume anything. As you can see on my last post, I quoted you.

So a last word, the term user-friendliness is something bad for you? I could call Mutt user-friendly, if I think of my experience with elm - so what? Do you see the plot in my saying?

Cheers,

Oliver

Last edited by Oliver (2007-03-25 10:03:26)

F!XMBR

Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. --Pericles

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

Oliver wrote:

Where would be Linux e.g. without Ubuntu, Suse etc.? I don't like these distros, but they are necessary for a healthy userbase. And you do need distros like Debian, Gentoo, Slackware or smaller ones like ArchLinux too. It's the variety which builds up a healthy userbase. And I don't see FreeBSD in danger, because it has a base system - Linux is only a kernel, so they are eager doing something alike, namely LSB. If you don't have a common denominator a babel of systems is very likely.
*BSD forks are something different and it's possible that some systems like PCBSD will be a fork in future, if FreeBSD isn't able to gain some momentum toward user-friendliness. And user-friendliness doesn't automatically culminate in bloatware - it's somewhat of a tightrope walk.

I had a recent discussion on a linux forum about consolidating all the distros into one , because essentially the different between the distros is there cosmetics.
Of course i was told i was on crack. The reasoning i used was that the BSD's all have different kernels, wheres the linux distros all share the same kernel, even though some may have quite a few patches, its still no way comparable to the difference between any of the four major BSD kernels.
That's one of the reasons i am sceptical of pcBSD and DesktopBSD that this could be the start of the BSD distros.

I personally think much more development could be done in linux if there were less distros, because who really needs to see 500 packages of XYZ.
I guess the same question could be asked, how comes there are not 500 BSD distros?
Ive noticed Gentoo and Debian have used some of the BSD kernels in there project, which is interesting.

Although it may not of shown, i do also use linux day in day out, the reason i use it is because its not rubbish. Genuinely its because something does not work on the BSD's but on linux.
This might not be a good analogy but i see linux and bsd like english languages, english, american, scottish,south africain , canadian, australian, afracain and so on , there english is english but the differences in dialects are so different. A bit like the kernels are different between linux and any of the BSD's. Both are unices but both so different.

Lastly, because linux does something that BSD does not, does not annoy me the slightest, as it seems to effect other people.
The reason being, do we need them both to be the same? no, the mass desktop market that linux is getting a bite out of is fine, the BSD's have a long history of pursuing  a different route from the day in a university to where it is now.

The whole tcp/ip stack for instance was built by using BSD, infact a lot of network protocols were. What DragonFlyBSD is doing is great, there is nothing too similar on the linux world.

BSDs are good for implementing or experimenting lower level technology because they have a track record.

Ive gone on a bit too far, but i hope you can see my picture.

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

>I personally think much more development could be done in linux if there were less distros, because who really needs to see 500 packages of XYZ.

True.

>Lastly, because linux does something that BSD does not, does not annoy me the slightest, as it seems to effect other people.

Most of the people would like to use *one* operating system for many task, but not many operating systems for many tasks wink

>The whole tcp/ip stack for instance was built by using BSD, infact a lot of network protocols were.

This is of course glorious history, but where are the glorious doings of today? I do see your plot and I have almost nothing to object. The mere quintessence of may saying is, we do need a healthy community to fulfil more essential tasks and variety isn't something bad in an operating system, isn't?

Look at the beginning of BSD, a mere patchset to original Unix. And why? Because of the slow development of original Unix - it's curious if you compare todays approach wink

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network … tml?page=1

Other universities became interested in the software at Berkeley, and so in 1977 Bill Joy, then a graduate student at Berkeley, assembled and sent out tapes of the first Berkeley Software Distribution (1BSD). 1BSD was an add-on to Sixth Edition Unix rather than a complete operating system in its own right; its main components were a Pascal compiler and Joy's ex line editor.

Wikipedia.org

>That's one of the reasons i am sceptical of pcBSD and DesktopBSD that this could be the start of the BSD distros.

It depends - PBI e.g. is an step toward something different, but PCBSD is until now 100% compatible to FreeBSD. DesktopBSD approach is different too, just delivering an easy entry to FreeBSD. You have to compile your ports too, but you can do it with a nice interface - it's less fearful for beginners wink
Real forks are indeed bad for BSD because they tend to weaken a somewhat small community. Linux is quiet different as I said, but who knows ... but because of this bable of different Linux-systems ("I want to learn Linux. Which Linux?") I migrated after 10-11 years from Linux to FreeBSD. We do have some more real forks already btw. MidnightBSD and MirOS.


"Linux Vs BSD Vs Solaris"

Keith Bostic: Yes, I am. BSD has always had the best technology, what it has lacked is timing and marketing.
[...]
O'Reilly: You say that FreeBSD is technically better than Linux. What evidence is there for this opinion? Or what areas of FreeBSD are significantly different from Linux as to make this case? If a technical person wanted to investigate this argument, where would you look to start?

Bostic: The obvious examples are the network stack and the filesystem support. It's been at least a year since I really looked at the Linux kernel, so you have to take this for what it's worth, but at that time the various BSD kernels were still significantly better engineered than the Linux kernel. For example, the Linux filesystem can lose data if you crash at the wrong moment. That's not acceptable. The Linux NFS support was pretty bad (not that BSD's was all that wonderful).

To be perfectly clear -- I'm not a Linux basher. Everybody that works on Linux or runs Linux is my good friend, we're on the same side and have a lot more shared goals than differences. That said, there was a clear technical differentiation between the BSD and Linux systems at the time. Now, to be fair, there's also a clear technical differentiation between BSD and Solaris, i.e., Solaris is currently a better engineered kernel.

http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2000/03/24/bostic.html

A rather interesting reading from Keith Bostic (2000).


In short: http://desktopbsd.net/wiki/doku.php?id= … nformation

There I gathered some interesting information about BSD/Unix and so on. Because I like history and I'm trying to sharpen the public awareness toward BSD (whether it's Free/Net or Open). In my opinion it would be nice to see some more development toward "different fields of glory", nothing more, nothing less. Do you call this a bad idea? Is critizism in open-source per se a bad attitude? I don't think so - it has nothing to do with "all or nothing" but "look at this, this could be interesting for BSD too".

F!XMBR

Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. --Pericles

62

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

scottro wrote:

DrJ would like something to handle his MS-centric,but necesary to work, apps, I'm with him too.

That's part of what I'm saying, but more broadly I would like to see the user base expand enough that the BSDs would become attractive to the commercial software vendors.  There should be BSD versions of all those that are available for Linux.  For me, that would be VMware (both for desktop and server virtualization use), Matlab and Labview.  No, not all of the applications I need will ever run natively (like Word and Photoshop), but it would be helpful to have a few key ones.

I am also coming to the conclusion that there needs a marketing or business development effort from BSD, and support from their community for funding to do so.  VMware would be a lot more interested if the FreeBSD Foundation could walk in and say that they have $1 million sitting in the bank from users who would buy VMware Workstation, for example.  The attitude of it not being the responsibility of the OS to get applications to run simply is bunk.  If you want applications, you have to pursue them unless you have the installed base of Windows or OS X.

I too would like to support only a few operating systems.  My small company is a mix of FreeBSD and Windows; adding Linux or Solaris or the Mac into the mix would require additional support that I'm not willing to do.  So if Linux or Solaris or the Mac come in, FreeBSD goes out, at least on the desktop.  There are only so many operating systems that I can support.  The company is not big enough to have a computer support person, so I have to do that, and my time is limited.

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

One question, you mentioned your 25 years realtionship to BSD - what has changed now? Okay your points are obvious, but why just now?

F!XMBR

Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. --Pericles

64

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

Why now?  The nature of my needs have changed.  The world is also a lot different than the 4.2BSD era.  Back then there were no graphical user interfaces or multimedia or anything like that.  The Internet in those days was still Usenet and uucp over 1200 Baud modems.  When I was on Sun Unix, I was doing straight research stuff, and I still kept IBM 3270 and HP graphics terminals for certain tasks.   The primary function of the Window manager was to have multiple terminal windows open.  That's about all it did.

These days there is just a lot more multimedia, as the web has exploded.  Grant applications were on paper only a year ago at NIH (the National Institutes for Health).  Now they are all electronic, and they require Windows (or Mac, very recently) software to use.  They suggest Wine for Linux users, but the BSD version did not work for it the last time I tried.  These grant applications also have to include letters from all the participants; invariably they come in Word format with graphical elements for letterheads, for example.  OO.o chokes on a lot of these. 

My use of digital image processing has increased, as I am looking in more detail at how certain devices perform.  While digital cameras are not exactly new, it really is only in the last five years or so where they have become pervasive.  (I am having a vendor stop by next week to demonstrate a camera more suitable for fluorescence imaging.)  I will also add real-time video pretty soon, and be able to edit those files.  I've not looked into it, but my supposition is that this will be a lot easier on Windows or the Mac.

Some experiments are requiring higher data acquisition rates from what is easy, so I have to come up with a way to do that.  The rates are not really that high -- 1 to 10 kHz -- but you have to be a lot more careful than the few Hz rates I used before.  Everyone in the area uses Labview, which is more than I need, but if I want to hire anyone to write the routines, I will have to use Labview.  In the old days, we had a dedicated HP minicomputer to handle those tasks; now what one can do with a PC in the lab is almost unbelievably powerful.

The sophistication of theory I've developed has progressed to the point where it is difficult to roll my own PDE routines any longer, so I am looking at using Matlab or a higher-level finite element solver.  These have been around for a long time (I used Matlab 20 years ago!) but I have not needed them until now.

I'm also running a business where I have to keep books that conform to US government grant standards.  I have to keep track of payroll, taxes and all of that nonsense.

Also, for the first time I have to set up and manage a network of computers, set up the servers, keep desktops up-to-date, install software, and keep it running.  You all know how much work that can be.

In progressing through these things, I keep banging my head against the wall of things that are just hard to do on BSD.  Not that they can't be done in principle, just that the high-level basic tools are not there.  I know the system really well, understand and generally approve of the philosophy, and what it does, it does very well.  It is just that it does not do enough of what I need any more, and I don't see it changing any time soon.

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

I was just curious, but thanks for the information smile

F!XMBR

Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. --Pericles

66

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

Probably too much information. 

But the needs of many in scientific or engineering research are not that different from mine.  They may differ in particulars, but overall what I'm doing is not particularly novel -- at least as far as the tools that I use.  Indeed, I'll probably hire a Berkeley grad student to do my Labview programming -- it is such a bog-standard tool that I would rather they do it than have to learn it myself.  I don't have the time.

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

No, it's never too much information. Without it you would never know which direction to take with an operating system, there are too much unknown factors in *BSD community.

F!XMBR

Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. --Pericles

68

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

Let me then add one other thing that I run into all the time, and sorry if this is too far off topic. 

Many grants and journals want you to submit your work in sections, namely, as separate PDF files (though most prefer .doc files, they usually are OK with PDFs).  That by itself is not a big deal, but I use the troff preprocessor refer to insert references into those documents.  So you cannot simply run the various sections -- you screw up the numbering of the references (usually I have 60 to 80).  The only way around this that I've found is to break the pages appropriately, run out the entire document, then then take the PDF file apart to fit the various sections. 

Adobe Acrobat does this sort of thing really well, and there really is no comparable tool for BSD.  Recently there have been a couple of command-line tools that might work either on the PS or the PDF files, but since I have Acrobat running I've not looked at them.  Acrobat is also very useful to reorder, add or delete various PDF files (always at the last minute, it seems) that go into these documents.

The irony is that the first thing that the grant agency or journal does is to put them back together into a single PDF file.  You just can't submit it that way.  But there's nothing I can do about that lunacy.

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

DrJ wrote:

I am also coming to the conclusion that there needs a marketing or business development effort from BSD, and support from their community for funding to do so.  VMware would be a lot more interested if the FreeBSD Foundation could walk in and say that they have $1 million sitting in the bank from users who would buy VMware Workstation, for example.

That kind of money does not exist in the BSD community, looking at http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/ , there goal is to raise $250,000 this year , they raised  $100,714 last year.

Last edited by lobster (2007-03-25 22:44:34)

70

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

lobster wrote:

That kind of money does not exist in the BSD community, looking at http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/ , there goal is to raise $250,000 this year , they raised  $100,714 last year.

Not right now, no.  That would be 5,000 people ponying up $200 for the putative product (or committing to pony up the cash).  If there aren't 5,000 people, then there is indeed no market for the product.  That does not seem like a lot of users to me -- I personally would commit to three licenses.  The FreeBSD Foundation could keep 10% of that ($100K) to fund the person doing the work.

Last edited by DrJ (2007-03-25 23:39:10)

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

DrJ wrote:

Not right now, no.  That would be 5,000 people ponying up $200 for the putative product (or committing to pony up the cash).  If there aren't 5,000 people, then there is indeed no market for the product.  That does not seem like a lot of users to me -- I personally would commit to three licenses.  The FreeBSD Foundation could keep 10% of that ($100K) to fund the person doing the work.

http://www.bsdstats.org/ shows freeBSD having 4,787 this month, of course there not 100% accurate, but its a rough idea of how many people use it.

72

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

lobster wrote:

http://www.bsdstats.org/ shows freeBSD having 4,787 this month, of course there not 100% accurate, but its a rough idea of how many people use it.

I don't buy it.  I've not registered any of my computers with bsdstats, for example.  PC-BSD alone has had 100,000 downloads of their (older) 1.2 release.  Now a download does not equal continuing use, but I have to believe that out of the 100,000 the retention rate is over 5%.  And that is for PC-BSD only -- not all of Free.

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

Stats aren't reality, just some hint maybe. Therefore it's essential to increase the userbase - what's a foundation worth with only a "small" number of donators? Almost nothing, so you see it isn't the need of a "2nd Ubuntu" but it's the need for more variety and therefore more possible users and possible donators.

F!XMBR

Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. --Pericles

74

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

Oliver -- any idea how many people have downloaded Desktop?  Or users in your forums?

Re: What do you want or like to see in any of the BSD's ?

Sorry, most of the downloads are from external mirrors. So to be honest, I guess not as much as PCBSD, far less indeed in my opinion. Compared to some even small Linux distro, more than less. Most of the people aren't very found of compiling hours by hours some ports like Firefox, KDE etc. or coping with problems in shell (like changes in portupgrade).
It's almost impossible to fulfill todays so-called usability at the desktop without destroying some principles of quality and security.
Apart from the lack of numbers, we have maybe 10-15 more or less active users in forum (1161 registered users). Maybe I'm somewhat pessimistic but I don't see a bright future for BSD at desktop. To be true, most of the "pros" aren't found of the mere existence of such "desktop-BSDs".

F!XMBR

Freedom is the sure possession of those alone who have the courage to defend it. --Pericles

Posts [ 51 to 75 of 125 ]

Pages Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next

You must login or register to post a reply