Discussion:
Thank you!
Jerry McAllister
2005-01-13 18:07:10 UTC
Permalink
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a real product
this linux!
Glad you're happy.
Sorry you can not seem to comprehend a user volunteer supported system.

Bye,

////jerry
Boris
Kris Kennaway
2005-01-13 18:08:39 UTC
Permalink
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a real product
this linux!
It's wonderful that you're so happy now!!

Kris
Jason Stewart
2005-01-13 18:12:12 UTC
Permalink
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a real product
this linux!
Boris
You're Welcome!

And thanks for taking the time to earn yourself an entry in my hall of
fame!:

:0:
* ^From:.****@yahoo.com*
/dev/null

Jason
Colin J. Raven
2005-01-13 18:16:29 UTC
Permalink
On Jan 13 at 09:57, Boris Spirialitious vomited up some 1's and 0's
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware.
Odd indeed, if anyone was going to be "made fun of" it might as well be
me since I'm such a n00b and incredibly limited in my thinking, yet
strange to say, I have never noted this to be the case. Yet. (*ducks*)

I assume the hardware you're attempting to run apps on under Linux is of
absolutely *no* consequence whatsoever. Why ask? It doesn't work, so it
must be the app. An unsuppported PCMCIA or PCI card? Noo, never happens!
A sound card that doesn't work under Mandrooky15.9999.1? Can't possibly
be.
Its like a real product this linux!
I'm ecstatically happy that you have made such a revolutionary discovery
and also that you are so delighted with it. Long may you continue to
enjoy the fruits of your research into thoroughly supported OS's.


Troll [burp]

Kind Regards and penguin corpses,
-Colin
Duo
2005-01-13 18:11:14 UTC
Permalink
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a real product
this linux!
Boris
NEXT WE USE THIS LEENUX TO KILL MOOSE AND SQUIRREL!

Trolls, they stay so crunchy in milk.

*plonk*
--
Duo

Dispensing Cluepons, one moron at a time.
martin hudec
2005-01-13 18:11:15 UTC
Permalink
Hello,
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a real product
this linux!
Nice to hear that you've found for what you have been looking for :).
Just three things:

1.) Maybe you could try to fix that problem (if it was really small)
by yourself. Maybe you could be more regardful to others and their
time.

2.) Looks like you gonna shit on linux when something larger will
emerge, and it will, and there will be noone to help you. Maybe then
you will revert back to Windows.

3.) Don't forget to shut the lights and close the door after you
leave.


Bon voyage,

Martin
--
martin hudec


* 421 907 303 393
* ***@aeternal.net
* http://www.aeternal.net

"Nothing travels faster than the speed of light with the possible
exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws."

Douglas Adams, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"
Jacob S
2005-01-13 19:43:27 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 09:57:49 -0800 (PST)
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I
report a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd
do they make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a
real product this linux!
Boris
Congratulations! For the first time in 6 years you have made me ashamed
of the fact that I learned Linux before I learned FreeBSD. I'm glad the
Linux lists I frequent aren't like that.

To the rest of the list members... don't hold him against the rest of
us Linux users. :-)

Jacob
Boris Spirialitious
2005-01-13 17:57:49 UTC
Permalink
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a real product
this linux!

Boris


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! � Get yours free!
Tabor Kelly
2005-01-14 03:21:48 UTC
Permalink
Boris Spirialitious wrote:

<snip>

It's like Dave Horsfall wrote:

_____________________
/| /| | | |
||__|| | | Please do not |
/ O O\__ | feed the |
/ \ | Trolls |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
--
Tabor Kelly
tkelly-freebsd-***@taborandtashell.net
http://tabor.taborandtashell.net
Duo
2005-01-14 04:18:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tabor Kelly
<snip>
_____________________
/| /| | | |
||__|| | | Please do not |
/ O O\__ | feed the |
/ \ | Trolls |
/ \ \|_____________________|
/ _ \ \ ||
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ | _||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | | --|
| | | |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ | ||
/ _ \\ | / `
* / \_ /- | | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
--
Indeed. One should never respond to a troll.

It's always so much more fun to respond *at* a troll. I find the most
satisfying response to be pointing and giggling at the offending creature.

FWIW, I did review this fellow's earlier posts. And, I have to say, he
won't be missed. Rude, condecending, and moreover, combative and
aggresively defensive over what could have been slightly minor matters.

Sad, but, nontheless, entertaining for 10 seconds. Sadly, the olde style
fun trolls don't exist anymore. An extinct beast. *sigh*
--
Duo
Ramiro Aceves
2005-01-14 11:13:04 UTC
Permalink
Hello FreeBSD Friends.

I have just arrived to the FreeBSD world. I am not an expert on
anything, I am only a computer fan and use my computer mainly for my
engineering work and hobbies (amateur radio, photography, astronomy,
etc.). I come from a happy Debian GNU/Linux experience. I paid
attention on FreeBSD when reading a Linux magazine and installed it two
months ago. I really do not have any important reasons to change, but I
admit that I am impressed and I like FreeBSD very much, and my interest
on it is incresing everyday. I like its centralized development and
its separation between the OS and the ports. Perhaps one day I will do
the change, but I first must feel safe and confortable with the FreeBSD,
the same that when I changed from WinDog to Linux.

I do not like linux-FreeBSD wars. I hate them. Both are good operating
systems with their pros and cons. Many of you tell that Linux is a
desktop OS, and that it is a chaothic OS. I do not agree with that, and
If you argue that, you do not know Linux well. When I speak about Linux,
I mean Debian or Gentoo. I do not think that they are chaothic or
intended for desktop. Debian put all the pieces together in one OS that
is in order and works nicely. Gentoo portage philosophy is similiar to
FreeBSD ports.

People on the FreeBSD and Debian GNU/Linux mailing lists are very kind
and help you in any case, if you ask questions politely and you have
searched and read tha manuals first.
So, why do we start always the war? The real war should be against the
Bill Gates OSes, instead of fighting among us. I have never heard a bad
word about FreeBSD on the Linux lists. Indeed, I think that most of
Linux people do not even know thet FreeBSD exists, some of them think
that it is another Linux distribution. On the oposite side, I have heard
several people hating Linux on this list, even comparing it with
WinDogs :-(


I hate the following wars:

BSD license vs GPL license
Linux vs xBSD
GNOME vs KDE
bash vs tcsh
text apps vs X apps
CUPS vs lpr

I think we should cooperate instead of fighting. Indeed, BSD code is on
Linux OSes, and GNU software is on FreeBSD ports...... etc...

Thank you very much and sorry for my bad english.

Just my 2 euro cents.

Ramiro Aceves. (Spain)
Ed Budd
2005-01-14 11:42:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ramiro Aceves
Hello FreeBSD Friends.
I have just arrived to the FreeBSD world. I am not an expert on
anything, I am only a computer fan and use my computer mainly for my
engineering work and hobbies (amateur radio, photography, astronomy,
etc.). I come from a happy Debian GNU/Linux experience. I paid
attention on FreeBSD when reading a Linux magazine and installed it two
months ago. I really do not have any important reasons to change, but I
admit that I am impressed and I like FreeBSD very much, and my interest
on it is incresing everyday. I like its centralized development and
its separation between the OS and the ports. Perhaps one day I will do
the change, but I first must feel safe and confortable with the FreeBSD,
the same that when I changed from WinDog to Linux.
I do not like linux-FreeBSD wars. I hate them. Both are good operating
systems with their pros and cons. Many of you tell that Linux is a
desktop OS, and that it is a chaothic OS. I do not agree with that, and
If you argue that, you do not know Linux well. When I speak about Linux,
I mean Debian or Gentoo. I do not think that they are chaothic or
intended for desktop. Debian put all the pieces together in one OS that
is in order and works nicely. Gentoo portage philosophy is similiar to
FreeBSD ports.
People on the FreeBSD and Debian GNU/Linux mailing lists are very kind
and help you in any case, if you ask questions politely and you have
searched and read tha manuals first.
So, why do we start always the war? The real war should be against the
Bill Gates OSes, instead of fighting among us. I have never heard a bad
word about FreeBSD on the Linux lists. Indeed, I think that most of
Linux people do not even know thet FreeBSD exists, some of them think
that it is another Linux distribution. On the oposite side, I have heard
several people hating Linux on this list, even comparing it with
WinDogs :-(
BSD license vs GPL license
Linux vs xBSD
GNOME vs KDE
bash vs tcsh
text apps vs X apps
CUPS vs lpr
I think we should cooperate instead of fighting. Indeed, BSD code is on
Linux OSes, and GNU software is on FreeBSD ports...... etc...
Thank you very much and sorry for my bad english.
Just my 2 euro cents.
FWIW I share your sentiments. FreeBSD absolutely rocks IMO, but so does
OpenBSD and Gentoo. I use all three in areas I've felt play to their
particular strengths and personalities. Having been on this list for
many months now, I have also observed that there are plenty of other
multi-platform folks hanging out here. I think the anti-Linux crowd is
in the minority (though occasionally quite vocal). Most of us have
enough "love" to share across multiple operating systems.

Er...except Windows...that just sucks :)

EB
martin hudec
2005-01-14 11:53:16 UTC
Permalink
Hello,
Post by Ramiro Aceves
If you argue that, you do not know Linux well. When I speak about Linux,
I mean Debian or Gentoo. I do not think that they are chaothic or
intended for desktop. Debian put all the pieces together in one OS that
is in order and works nicely. Gentoo portage philosophy is similiar to
FreeBSD ports.
Debian and Gentoo distributions are not chaotic, but I think that
Gentoo is primarily oriented for desktop, although one can use it
happily as server. Gentoo portage is inspired by ports :).
Post by Ramiro Aceves
So, why do we start always the war? The real war should be against the
Bill Gates OSes, instead of fighting among us. I have never heard a bad
word about FreeBSD on the Linux lists.
What is meaning of your words? I am missing the point. You are asking
why is someone starting the war? And on other hand you say that we
should fight against Microsoft OSes? This kind of hatred is in my
humble opinion sign of inmaturity. It is really so hard to respect
others? To respect their choices, reasons? Why? If one could invest
his time he puts into hatred aimed towards Microsoft, if one could
invest it to further promote/develop his OS of choice instead, then it
would definitely be a better world for my servers and desktops to live
in. Don't you think?
Post by Ramiro Aceves
BSD license vs GPL license
Linux vs xBSD
GNOME vs KDE
bash vs tcsh
text apps vs X apps
CUPS vs lpr
I just add: Windows vs Linux/Unix.
Post by Ramiro Aceves
I think we should cooperate instead of fighting. Indeed, BSD code is on
Linux OSes, and GNU software is on FreeBSD ports...... etc...
If you are really that nice, why are you inducing others to make war
with Windows? :)


Cheers,

Martin
--
martin hudec


* 421 907 303 393
* ***@aeternal.net
* http://www.aeternal.net

"Nothing travels faster than the speed of light with the possible
exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws."

Douglas Adams, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"
Ramiro Aceves
2005-01-14 13:33:58 UTC
Permalink
martin hudec wrote:
MH> Hello,
MH>
MH> On Fri, Jan 14, 2005 at 12:13:04PM +0100 or thereabouts, RA>>miro
Aceves wrote:
MH>
RA>>If you argue that, you do not know Linux well. When I speak about
Linux,
RA>>I mean Debian or Gentoo. I do not think that they are chaothic or
RA>>intended for desktop. Debian put all the pieces together in one OS that
RA>>is in order and works nicely. Gentoo portage philosophy is similiar to
RA>>FreeBSD ports.
MH>
MH>
MH> Debian and Gentoo distributions are not chaotic, but I think that
MH> Gentoo is primarily oriented for desktop, although one can use it
MH> happily as server. Gentoo portage is inspired by ports :).
MH>
MH>

Ok, you are right.

RA>>So, why do we start always the war? The real war should be against the
RA>>Bill Gates OSes, instead of fighting among us. I have never heard a bad
RA>>word about FreeBSD on the Linux lists.
MH>
MH>
MH> What is meaning of your words? I am missing the point. You are asking
MH> why is someone starting the war? And on other hand you say that we
MH> should fight against Microsoft OSes? This kind of hatred is in my

Sorry, my english is so bad that I can not say everything I think. I do
not like to start wars among free OSes, I enjoy fighting the Bill OSes.

MH> humble opinion sign of inmaturity. It is really so hard to respect
MH> others? To respect their choices, reasons? Why? If one could invest
MH> his time he puts into hatred aimed towards Microsoft, if one could
MH> invest it to further promote/develop his OS of choice instead, then it
MH> would definitely be a better world for my servers and desktops to live
MH> in. Don't you think?

For me, making the war against Bill OSes means using Free Software OSes
(Debian, Gentoo, FreeBSD.......)instead Bill's one. Everybody is free
to use the OS he like, so I choose FreeBSD or Linux simply because for
me they are better. I also try to evangelize my friends here in my city
to use free software, but at the moment, it has been a difficult task.


MH>
MH>
RA>>I hate the following wars:
RA>>BSD license vs GPL license
RA>>Linux vs xBSD
RA>>GNOME vs KDE
RA>>bash vs tcsh
RA>>text apps vs X apps
RA>>CUPS vs lpr
MH>
MH>
MH> I just add: Windows vs Linux/Unix.
MH>
MH>
RA>>I think we should coopeRA>>te instead of fighting. Indeed, BSD code
is on
RA>>Linux OSes, and GNU software is on FreeBSD ports...... etc...
MHMH>
MHMH>
MHMH> If you are really that nice, why are you inducing others to
make war
MHMH> with Windows? :)

By making the war, as I stated above, I mean using FreeSoftware instead
propietary one.


MHMH>
MHMH>
MHMH> Cheers,
MHMH>
MHMH> Martin
MHMH>

Thanks for your response.

Ramiro.
Anthony Atkielski
2005-01-14 15:16:09 UTC
Permalink
Ramiro Aceves writes:

RA> I do not like to start wars among free OSes, I enjoy fighting the
RA> Bill OSes.

There are plenty of challenging video games on the market if you like to
fight.

RA> For me, making the war against Bill OSes means using Free Software
RA> OSes (Debian, Gentoo, FreeBSD.......)instead Bill's one. Everybody
RA> is free to use the OS he like, so I choose FreeBSD or Linux simply
RA> because for me they are better. I also try to evangelize my friends
RA> here in my city to use free software, but at the moment, it has been
RA> a difficult task.

Perhaps if you used something other than "let's make war against Bill
OSes" as an argument, you might find the task less difficult.

RA> By making the war, as I stated above, I mean using FreeSoftware
RA> instead propietary one.

I prefer to use whatever is best for the job.
--
Anthony
Anthony Atkielski
2005-01-14 12:34:33 UTC
Permalink
Ramiro Aceves writes:

RA> So, why do we start always the war? The real war should be against the
RA> Bill Gates OSes, instead of fighting among us.

Professionals and serious amateurs in IT never wage "wars" at all.
--
Anthony
Giorgos Keramidas
2005-01-14 12:55:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Atkielski
Post by Ramiro Aceves
So, why do we start always the war? The real war should be against the
Bill Gates OSes, instead of fighting among us.
Professionals and serious amateurs in IT never wage "wars" at all.
Well said.
Andrew L. Gould
2005-01-14 13:11:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ramiro Aceves
Hello FreeBSD Friends.
I have just arrived to the FreeBSD world. I am not an expert on
anything, I am only a computer fan and use my computer mainly for my
engineering work and hobbies (amateur radio, photography, astronomy,
etc.). I come from a happy Debian GNU/Linux experience. I paid
attention on FreeBSD when reading a Linux magazine and installed it
two months ago. I really do not have any important reasons to change,
but I admit that I am impressed and I like FreeBSD very much, and my
interest on it is incresing everyday. I like its centralized
development and its separation between the OS and the ports. Perhaps
one day I will do the change, but I first must feel safe and
confortable with the FreeBSD, the same that when I changed from
WinDog to Linux.
I do not like linux-FreeBSD wars. I hate them. Both are good
operating systems with their pros and cons. Many of you tell that
Linux is a desktop OS, and that it is a chaothic OS. I do not agree
with that, and If you argue that, you do not know Linux well. When I
speak about Linux, I mean Debian or Gentoo. I do not think that they
are chaothic or intended for desktop. Debian put all the pieces
together in one OS that is in order and works nicely. Gentoo portage
philosophy is similiar to FreeBSD ports.
People on the FreeBSD and Debian GNU/Linux mailing lists are very
kind and help you in any case, if you ask questions politely and you
have searched and read tha manuals first.
So, why do we start always the war? The real war should be against
the Bill Gates OSes, instead of fighting among us. I have never heard
When you focus against anything, you risk losing focus on constructive
goals.
Post by Ramiro Aceves
a bad word about FreeBSD on the Linux lists. Indeed, I think that
most of Linux people do not even know thet FreeBSD exists, some of
them think that it is another Linux distribution. On the oposite
Yes, there's even a hardware vendor (http://www.sub300.com/) that lists
FreeBSD under "Other Linux Distribution."
Post by Ramiro Aceves
side, I have heard several people hating Linux on this list, even
comparing it with WinDogs :-(
BSD license vs GPL license
Linux vs xBSD
GNOME vs KDE
bash vs tcsh
text apps vs X apps
CUPS vs lpr
Did you forget Linux vs Gnu Linux? ;-)
Post by Ramiro Aceves
I think we should cooperate instead of fighting. Indeed, BSD code is
on Linux OSes, and GNU software is on FreeBSD ports...... etc...
Thank you very much and sorry for my bad english.
Just my 2 euro cents.
Ramiro Aceves. (Spain)
Best regards,

Andrew Gould
Boris Spirialitious
2005-01-14 00:40:31 UTC
Permalink
Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
that need support for the latest hardware. Thank you for informing
me.

Boris
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a real product
this linux!
Glad you're happy.
Sorry you can not seem to comprehend a user volunteer supported system.

Bye,

////jerry
Boris
_______________________________________________
freebsd-***@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-***@freebsd.org"


---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
Jerry McAllister
2005-01-14 02:05:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Boris Spirialitious
Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
that need support for the latest hardware. Thank you for informing
me.
Thought you decided to leave.
That's why I said 'Bye'

Someone who begins with their first post on the questions list with
invective and insults instead of asking a question will, not surprisingly,
not receive much positive response. People here are interested in
getting questions answered and problems solved. They are not
interested in responding to juvenile attacks.

////jerry
Post by Boris Spirialitious
Boris
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a real product
this linux!
Glad you're happy.
Sorry you can not seem to comprehend a user volunteer supported system.
Bye,
////jerry
Boris
Chris
2005-01-14 02:19:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry McAllister
Post by Boris Spirialitious
Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
that need support for the latest hardware. Thank you for informing
me.
Thought you decided to leave.
That's why I said 'Bye'
Someone who begins with their first post on the questions list with
invective and insults instead of asking a question will, not surprisingly,
not receive much positive response. People here are interested in
getting questions answered and problems solved. They are not
interested in responding to juvenile attacks.
////jerry
Post by Boris Spirialitious
Boris
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a real product
this linux!
Glad you're happy.
Sorry you can not seem to comprehend a user volunteer supported system.
Bye,
////jerry
Boris
Ok - let's just call em what he is. This one just does not grasp the
concepts of manors much less being some variant of a human being -

So, I'll stoop to a level IT can understand - This one is a f***-tard.
Plain and simple.

Furthermore, I apologize to anyone that is offended by the tone of my
posting. Let's just call it as we see it.
--
Best regards,
Chris
Nikolas Britton
2005-01-14 04:11:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Boris Spirialitious
Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
that need support for the latest hardware. Thank you for informing
me.
Boris
Personally I moved away from Linux because of all the support problems
it had, I've learned more about UNIX from the 1 1/2 years using FreeBSD
then I ever did in the 5 years using Linux. This is mainly do to the
excellent centralized and authoritative documentation available for the
project. Also it really helped that FreeBSD is an Operating System and
not just a kernel + 3rd party user & system tools hodgepodged together
into a distribution. Also FreeBSD nor Linux are good choices if your
looking for support and the latest hardware. Being able to support
yourself with minimal help from others is par for the course for any
open source UNIX solution. Windows and other commercial solutions are
available if you need hand holding. Good luck on your Linux odyssey, and
your welcome back anytime as long as you don't keep burning your bridges
and apologize to the FreeBSD team for calling them "Very stupid people"
(Re: Supermicro Hardware and FreeBSD, 01/05/***@10:50), they would have
helped you if you hadn't of said that.
Anthony Atkielski
2005-01-14 04:26:57 UTC
Permalink
Boris Spirialitious writes:

BS> Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
BS> that need support for the latest hardware.

It's not a question of latest, it's a question of which hardware.
FreeBSD, like all operating systems, targets a broad but not universal
user base, and so the mix of hardware that it supports doesn't cover
every conceivable device, although it will naturally overlap for the
most part with any other OS.

For example, given the predominance of FreeBSD as a heavy-duty server (a
quick check of the Web will readily show that FreeBSD is being used all
over the place), I'd expect to see relatively weak support for joysticks
and game accessories, and relatively strong support for backup devices
and terminals. I'd expect to see the opposite with Linux, which is
heavily promoted as a desktop OS.

I use FreeBSD as a straight server OS, and it seems to support whatever
devices I care to connect to it in that capacity. I don't have very
exotic requirements, though.

It is also true that the more widely used and/or better funded an OS is,
the more devices it usually supports. Many people are trying to make
money with Linux, so they get it to support more devices; and it has a
large user base, which encourages more people and companies to volunteer
hardware support. Windows is in a similar position. Even with Windows,
though, you see differences: NT-based systems traditionally have had
better support for server-oriented devices (like FreeBSD), whereas
consumer versions of Windows emphasized game ports, fancy video cards,
and the like.

Currently I consider FreeBSD the best available choice for a server, and
if it weren't for FreeBSD, I'd probably select one of the other
open-source BSDs. Linux is too incoherent and desktop-oriented today for
heavy server use, IMO. And if I want a pure desktop, I just run Windows.

For companies with a minimal IT staff, I'd recommend Windows 2000 for
servers in most cases. If they have a qualified IT staff, I might
suggest some commercial flavor of UNIX. If they have a very qualified
IT staff, I might suggest FreeBSD. The reason for requiring the
qualified IT staff for FreeBSD is not that FreeBSD is any less reliable
than the other choices; it's just that FreeBSD has no formal support
structure that one can call at 3 AM to fix a broken server, whereas
commercial OS publishers usually do (even then, if the staff is really
clueless, it's safest for them to avoid any type of UNIX entirely). For
desktops, I always recommend Windows.
--
Anthony
Alvaro J. Gurdián
2005-01-14 14:18:29 UTC
Permalink
OK we get it you don't like freeBSD.

Now shut up and quit wasting everyones bandwidth
Post by Boris Spirialitious
Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
that need support for the latest hardware. Thank you for informing
me.
Boris
I just wanted to thank you for making Freebsd 5.3 so badly. We changed
to linux and our application runs so much faster its unbelievable. I report
a small problem and they work hard to fix it. Not like freebsd do they
make fun of me or ask me to give them hardware. Its like a real product
this linux!
Glad you're happy.
Sorry you can not seem to comprehend a user volunteer supported system.
Bye,
////jerry
Boris
_______________________________________________
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
lord grinny
2005-01-14 12:41:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Atkielski
RA> So, why do we start always the war? The real war
should be against the
Post by Anthony Atkielski
RA> Bill Gates OSes, instead of fighting among us.
Professionals and serious amateurs in IT never wage
"wars" at all.
Don't they?? Then what are all the law suits about?

GRINNY

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Anthony Atkielski
2005-01-14 12:43:48 UTC
Permalink
lord grinny writes:

lg> Don't they?? Then what are all the law suits about?

Business.
--
Anthony
Andrew L. Gould
2005-01-14 12:58:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Anthony Atkielski
lg> Don't they?? Then what are all the law suits about?
Business.
I respectfully disagree. Business is people. People who do business
well abhor lawsuits.

"Lawyers are like nuclear missiles -- they have theirs, so we have ours.
But once you use them, they f**k everything up." -- Larry the
Liquidator (Danny Devito's role in "Other Peoples Money"):

Andrew Gould
martin hudec
2005-01-14 12:46:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by lord grinny
Don't they?? Then what are all the law suits about?
Simple, dear Watson. About human stupidity and greed.


Cheers,

Martin
--
martin hudec


* 421 907 303 393
* ***@aeternal.net
* http://www.aeternal.net

"Nothing travels faster than the speed of light with the possible
exception of bad news, which obeys its own special laws."

Douglas Adams, "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy"
Duo
2005-01-14 14:27:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ramiro Aceves
Post by Anthony Atkielski
RA> So, why do we start always the war? The real war
should be against the
Post by Anthony Atkielski
RA> Bill Gates OSes, instead of fighting among us.
Professionals and serious amateurs in IT never wage
"wars" at all.
Don't they?? Then what are all the law suits about?
It should be noted here, that, by and large for the most part, lawsuits
are rarely waged by the folks actually doing the toiling. The people who
pour their blood, sweat, tears into the work being fought over, are rarely
the ones who initiate serious nuclear level legal action. People with a
passion for what they do, are typically consumed by their passion for it.
I should know. I love any damned thing with a circuit.

An example is the SCO suit. This is a purely greed motivated lawsuit. No
serious I.T. Professional, one who actually gives a damn about the
profession, is behind it really. Sure, there are lines of debate. But, in
my experience, serious IT folks just love playing with their toys. They
could care less about waging wars for money in the typical business
fashion.

This is why software patent debates are all the rage, atm. It inhibits
being able to make new toys from old ones. Imagine child A, suing child B,
because child B has built something with his lego's that vaguely resembles
something that child A built. The vague resemblence in this case, is that
blocks were stuck together to make something.

That's a very vanilla way to sum it all up. Generic, if you will. But, in
the end, I just want to point out, legal wars arent started very often by
people who sign up for mailing lists such as these. They are generally
started and waged by the people wishing to make money off the work of
people who sign up for mailing lists such as these. It's an important
distinction, and one that shouldnt be lost in the mix of voices.

More to the point, I think, by and large, religious OS wars are what you
expect from packet kiddies sitting in #warez on some IRC network. It
certianly dosent belong here. And, such folks are not I.T. professionals.

This is a list, where, I have seen, you are treated according to how you
act. If you act like a child, you will be treated as such. No war, no
agression. The person who started this thread, acted like a crying little
child, because, he couldnt have what he wanted, when he wanted, and how he
wanted it. FreeBSD is not the 4 seasons. It's a hostel. You get what you
pay for. And, how you carry yourself, is going to reflect on how you are
percieved.

If you cannot deal with that, then, you maybe need to find somewhere else
to go. FreeBSD won't die because Boris can't get his motherboard to work.
FreeBSD will however, suffer if it tolerates people like Boris, who after
not getting the answer they wanted, troll and instigate flame wars.

It's why its always safest to give a little giggle, and move on. No flame
war needed. =)

Just my $0.02. =)
--
Duo
F***@aol.com
2005-01-14 17:56:56 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/13/05 11:27:40 PM Eastern Standard Time,
***@wanadoo.fr writes:
BS> Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
BS> that need support for the latest hardware.
Post by Anthony Atkielski
It's not a question of latest, it's a question of which hardware.
FreeBSD, like all operating systems, targets a broad but not universal
user base, and so the mix of hardware that it supports doesn't cover
every conceivable device, although it will naturally overlap for the
most part with any other OS.
For example, given the predominance of FreeBSD as a heavy-duty server
------
You clearly haven't been paying attention....

The entire point of this extended discussion, for those who have paid
attention, is that FreeBSD 4.x, which is admittedly the fastest version
available, DOES NOT work with intel's fastest CPUs because it doesnt
support the necessary chipsets, AND, that freebsd "people" would
rather ridicule people that ask why than fix things.

So your claim that its a "heavy-duty server" platform is tainted by the
fact that in order to use the fastest server Mobos, you have to use the
slower,
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
Len Zettel
2005-01-14 13:05:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by F***@aol.com
In a message dated 1/13/05 11:27:40 PM Eastern Standard Time,
BS> Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
BS> that need support for the latest hardware.
Post by Anthony Atkielski
It's not a question of latest, it's a question of which hardware.
FreeBSD, like all operating systems, targets a broad but not universal
user base, and so the mix of hardware that it supports doesn't cover
every conceivable device, although it will naturally overlap for the
most part with any other OS.
For example, given the predominance of FreeBSD as a heavy-duty server
------
You clearly haven't been paying attention....
The entire point of this extended discussion, for those who have paid
attention, is that FreeBSD 4.x, which is admittedly the fastest version
available, DOES NOT work with intel's fastest CPUs because it doesnt
support the necessary chipsets, AND, that freebsd "people" would
rather ridicule people that ask why than fix things.
So your claim that its a "heavy-duty server" platform is tainted by the
fact that in order to use the fastest server Mobos, you have to use the
slower,
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
Not necessarily. The interesting question hasn't been addressed yet.
Is 5.3 on its fastest supported chipset faster or slower than 4.10 on
its fastest supported chipset? I would be willing to guess that it is.
Then the whole thing gets down to a difference of opinion about
development priorities in the face of limited resources.
Better to expend resources on making 5.3 faster than 4.10 on all
chipsets or retrofit 4.10 to the new ones?
-LenZ-
Post by F***@aol.com
_______________________________________________
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
Kris Kennaway
2005-01-14 19:04:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Len Zettel
Post by F***@aol.com
In a message dated 1/13/05 11:27:40 PM Eastern Standard Time,
BS> Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
BS> that need support for the latest hardware.
Post by Anthony Atkielski
It's not a question of latest, it's a question of which hardware.
FreeBSD, like all operating systems, targets a broad but not universal
user base, and so the mix of hardware that it supports doesn't cover
every conceivable device, although it will naturally overlap for the
most part with any other OS.
For example, given the predominance of FreeBSD as a heavy-duty server
------
You clearly haven't been paying attention....
The entire point of this extended discussion, for those who have paid
attention, is that FreeBSD 4.x, which is admittedly the fastest version
available, DOES NOT work with intel's fastest CPUs because it doesnt
support the necessary chipsets, AND, that freebsd "people" would
rather ridicule people that ask why than fix things.
So your claim that its a "heavy-duty server" platform is tainted by the
fact that in order to use the fastest server Mobos, you have to use the
slower,
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
Not necessarily. The interesting question hasn't been addressed yet.
Is 5.3 on its fastest supported chipset faster or slower than 4.10 on
its fastest supported chipset? I would be willing to guess that it is.
Then the whole thing gets down to a difference of opinion about
development priorities in the face of limited resources.
Better to expend resources on making 5.3 faster than 4.10 on all
chipsets or retrofit 4.10 to the new ones?
Mr AOL Troll also likes to ignore emails refuting his chosen
world-view (e.g. earlier emails on the topic he's trolling about
above), so he should just be ignored since meaningful discourse isn't
possible. It's too bad he's now choosing to be even more antisocial
by changing his email address to avoid the procmail filters of those
for whom his rantings have lost their amusement, although this just
makes his behaviour more obvious to other bystanders.

Kris
Jerry McAllister
2005-01-14 19:10:22 UTC
Permalink
... Much misc drivel excised.
Post by Len Zettel
Post by F***@aol.com
rather ridicule people that ask why than fix things.
So your claim that its a "heavy-duty server" platform is tainted by the
fact that in order to use the fastest server Mobos, you have to use the
slower,
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
=20
Not necessarily. The interesting question hasn't been addressed yet.
Is 5.3 on its fastest supported chipset faster or slower than 4.10 on
its fastest supported chipset? I would be willing to guess that it is.
Then the whole thing gets down to a difference of opinion about
development priorities in the face of limited resources.
Better to expend resources on making 5.3 faster than 4.10 on all
chipsets or retrofit 4.10 to the new ones?
Mr AOL Troll also likes to ignore emails refuting his chosen
world-view (e.g. earlier emails on the topic he's trolling about
above), so he should just be ignored since meaningful discourse isn't
possible. It's too bad he's now choosing to be even more antisocial
by changing his email address to avoid the procmail filters of those
for whom his rantings have lost their amusement, although this just
makes his behaviour more obvious to other bystanders.
Yah, sorry I responded, but sometimes it gets to be too much.

////jerry
Kris
Anthony Atkielski
2005-01-14 21:37:33 UTC
Permalink
Len Zettel writes:

LZ> Better to expend resources on making 5.3 faster than 4.10 on all
LZ> chipsets or retrofit 4.10 to the new ones?

New OS versions should always provide either better functionality with
the same performance, or better performance with the same functionality.
Ideally they'd provide both better performance and better functionality.
However, if a new release runs more slowly than an old release or drops
functionality compared to an old release, it becomes difficult to
justify "upgrading" to it.

I moved to 5.3 originally because I thought I had a software problem on
my server. After it turned out to be a hardware problem that required
building a completely new server, I installed 5.3 simply because it was
the latest available and it finally looked as though it might be stable.

However, my system is not hurting for performance because it is lightly
loaded in comparison with the amount of hardware horsepower it has
available. On a system that is pegged to the wall most of the time, any
reduction in performance is a serious problem. But then again, I know
from my experience in optimizing systems that, if you are so close to
the wall that you can't afford even a tiny drop in performance, you need
more hardware, anyway (because an average load of, say, 99% almost
invariably means many peak loads that completely overload the existing
system, unless your system has an extraordinarily constant load
profile).
--
Anthony
Jerry McAllister
2005-01-14 18:52:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by F***@aol.com
In a message dated 1/13/05 11:27:40 PM Eastern Standard Time,
BS> Oh, but I do understand! FreeBSD is not good choice for companies
BS> that need support for the latest hardware.
Post by Anthony Atkielski
It's not a question of latest, it's a question of which hardware.
FreeBSD, like all operating systems, targets a broad but not universal
user base, and so the mix of hardware that it supports doesn't cover
every conceivable device, although it will naturally overlap for the
most part with any other OS.
For example, given the predominance of FreeBSD as a heavy-duty server
------
You clearly haven't been paying attention....
No, you clearly haven't been paying attention!

The entire point of this _extended_ "discussion" is that people who begin
their posts with ridicule and name calling are not likely to get any
positive response - regardless of their high opinions of themselves.

Though, some people have repeatedly told you that, for their applications,
FreeBSD works best and for some situations it does not, you just want to
harp on a narrow item that no-one disputes. Then you pretend that you
are revealing something to the world for which the world responds, 'duh'.

You completely ignore the point that in the type of environment that
FreeBSD is created and used, which is non-paid volunteers making solutions
to their own problems and then sharing them free of charge with the general
community, work gets done on what those unpaid volunteers are able to work
on with what resources they have.

In that type of environment it is very reasonable, normal, to say,
OK. If you are having a problem with that point, do some work to
fix it and submit the improvement to be included in the whole.
The volunteers who are working on actually contributing to the project
rather than just shooting off their mouths trying to tear it down, do
not have the resources to buy every piece of quality or junk that is
out there and do development for it. They have to work on their own stuff.

Further, if a vendor does not choose to help the project function on their
own piece of quality or junk hardware, there is very little the volunteers
can do to make them do it. Note, it has nothing to do with how hot the
piece of quality or junk is. It has to do with if the unpaid volunteers,
in their spare time, can undertake to do some work to support that piece
of quality or junk. Sure, some enlightened companies permit some of their
staff to work on relevant issues on company time. That doesn't change
anything. They are still only doing work on what is useful to the
employer and it is supplied to the general community, gratis.
They are not working to market a competing OS.

So, the response you have repeatedly received, that if you cannot make
a useful contribution or add to the useful pool of information for those
actually freely making useful contributions, then your behavior is a drag
on the community. Quit pretending you have anything useful to say and
let the real people get back to work without having to endure your trash.

Continually trying to drag the community down without making any
useful contribution is the worst of being a troll - or as I previously
commented, I hate to denigrate the good name of troll in this case.
Post by F***@aol.com
The entire point of this extended discussion, for those who have paid
attention, is that FreeBSD 4.x, which is admittedly the fastest version
available, DOES NOT work with intel's fastest CPUs because it doesnt
support the necessary chipsets, AND, that freebsd "people" would
rather ridicule people that ask why than fix things.
So your claim that its a "heavy-duty server" platform is tainted by the
fact that in order to use the fastest server Mobos, you have to use the
slower,
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
Nobody is establishing anything. FreeBSD is created by volunteers who
want to have it to use and they kindly make their efforts available to
the world free of charge. Because of this, others, finding needs, add
their own contributions because they want that correction made or that
ability added. Some of us just sit our here and gratefully eat up the
good stuff and hope it keeps on coming - maybe post an occasional
suggestion or answer to a question. It is as simple and straight forward
as that. People who discover and like it, tell others who are free to like
it or not to like it and are invited to contribute if they are able.
But, useless diatribes, belittling and name calling is unwelcome.

So, just changing your Email address makes no difference. The
behavior remains unhelpful, unnecessary and better off undone.
Trying to tie it to some supposed technical issue changes nothing.

////jerry
Greg Barniskis
2005-01-14 18:53:06 UTC
Permalink
That always cheerful and bright ***@aol wrote:
[snip]
Post by F***@aol.com
So your claim that its a "heavy-duty server" platform is tainted by the
fact that in order to use the fastest server Mobos, you have to use the
slower,
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
As was pretty clearly explained in previous threads, FreeBSD 5.x is
slower than 4.x *at certain tasks under certain conditions* because
it is rather considerably more featureful and complex than 4.x
(duh?). It has also been said to be rather faster than 4.x at
certain other tasks under other conditions, so your mantra of "5.x
is slow" is really growing a bit thin. If the rough spots bother
you, please contribute patches, contribute money, contribute
hardware, or... at the very least, stop changing your address so I
can plonk you once and for all without resorting to nuking the
entire aol domain. 8-P

I've been using FreeBSD since 2.1 (has it really been 8 years?)
because the development seems so consistently focused on being the
"best" as measured by solidity, consistency, standards conformance
and clarity of component boundaries rather than "best" as in
slickest-looking or fastest through the gate. If speed comes by
cutting corners, bending rules or mixing up things that are rightly
separated, I don't want it, thanks anyway.

Many, many thanks to all who contribute work, or money, or sage
advice, or the very least, a bit of good humor to this project and list.
--
Greg Barniskis, Computer Systems Integrator
South Central Library System (SCLS)
Library Interchange Network (LINK)
<gregb at scls.lib.wi.us>, (608) 266-6348
Charles Swiger
2005-01-14 18:46:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by F***@aol.com
The entire point of this extended discussion, for those who have paid
attention, is that FreeBSD 4.x, which is admittedly the fastest version
available, DOES NOT work with intel's fastest CPUs because it doesnt
support the necessary chipsets,
Let's pretend for a second that what you've claimed here is completely
accurate rather than exaggerated for rhetorical purposes.

What are you doing to help, ***@aol, or whatever your new handle for
today is?

You've got access to the FreeBSD source code, Intel publishes lots of
data about their chipsets, so between the two, you've got everything
you need to change FreeBSD to work on the specific motherboards you
care so much about. Either you make positive contributions, or you
choose not to-- in which case you are wasting your time.
Post by F***@aol.com
AND, that freebsd "people" would rather ridicule people that ask why
than fix things.
The overwhelming majority of people on the FreeBSD lists are polite and
helpful, but some people are willing to make exceptions for trolls.

If you don't like being ridiculed, try doing something constructive for
a change and compare the response you get to your current approach.
Even if you fail to learn anything, you will at least benefit by acting
like a productive human being for the duration.
--
-Chuck
Erik Norgaard
2005-01-14 20:31:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by F***@aol.com
The entire point of this extended discussion, for those who have paid
attention, is that FreeBSD 4.x, which is admittedly the fastest version
available, DOES NOT work with intel's fastest CPUs because it doesnt
support the necessary chipsets, AND, that freebsd "people" would
rather ridicule people that ask why than fix things.
So your claim that its a "heavy-duty server" platform is tainted by the
fact that in order to use the fastest server Mobos, you have to use the
slower,
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
Dear Mr X.

You might be aware of DragonFlyBSD - it was forked from FBSD 4.x due to
disagreements on the path of development for the 5.x branch developing
SMP support among other things. The founder Mathew Dillon believed his
way was the better and disagreements with the FBSD development team
eventually led to the fork. In july 2004 v.1.0 was released.

I don't know about performance DFBSD vs FBSD5 vs FBSD4, and I don't know
about hardware support, in fact I don't know much about DFBSD apart from
the name.

But, if you like FBSD4, then DFBSD may be a viable alternative you
should try out. However, the develpment team and user base is much
smaller than that of FBSD, you need to be much more oriented at
contributing to the project if you want progress to be made.

I suggest you give it a try, make your choice, be it FBSD4/5 or DFBSD.
Both DFBSD and FBSD as you know is delivered "AS IS" granting you only
the right to be happy.

Cheers, Erik
--
Ph: +34.666334818 web: www.locolomo.org
S/MIME Certificate: http://www.locolomo.org/crt/2004071206.crt
Subject ID: A9:76:7A:ED:06:95:2B:8D:48:97:CE:F2:3F:42:C8:F2:22:DE:4C:B9
Fingerprint: 4A:E8:63:38:46:F6:9A:5D:B4:DC:29:41:3F:62:D3:0A:73:25:67:C2
Anthony Atkielski
2005-01-14 21:32:08 UTC
Permalink
***@aol.com writes:

Fac> The entire point of this extended discussion, for those who have
Fac> paid attention, is that FreeBSD 4.x, which is admittedly the
Fac> fastest version available, DOES NOT work with intel's fastest CPUs
Fac> because it doesnt support the necessary chipsets ...

While I'll grant that this is an inconvenience, it doesn't seem to be
any different from any other software publisher's policies. Most
publishers will stop improving an older release family at some point in
favor of a new release family. There are both good and not-so-good
reasons for such policies. One good reason is that trying to
continually move forward with two independent release families requires
nearly twice the resources of a single family, and spreads development
resources quite thin. One not-so-good reason is that old release
families aren't as much fun to code for programmers as new families are,
and so developers like to find reasons to abandon them.

I have the same problem with other operating systems, and with other
applications. My old copy of Windows NT Server won't run on or support
many modern hardware configurations--that's what forced me to install
Windows XP on another machine. Worse yet, I can't recycle the NT machine
because some of the essential applications and hardware I use have been
abandoned in Windows XP. New versions of Windows server OSes cost far
more than the (already expensive) old versions, too. I don't see how
this is any better than the situation with FreeBSD.

Fac> ... AND, that freebsd "people" would rather ridicule people that
Fac> ask why than fix things.

People who work on FreeBSD have a rather puerile tendency to push away
anyone who says anything they don't want to hear--I'll certainly grant
that. While one can understand a certain lack of enthusiasm from a
volunteer organization (they receive nothing for their efforts, so one
can hardly expect them to jump on every problem and work three shifts to
fix it), actively rejecting anyone who doesn't say nice things is a bit
immature.

This is, IMO, the single greatest obstacles to using FreeBSD in
corporate and mission-critical environments, and it's the main reason
why I'd be extremely hesitant about recommending FreeBSD in such
environments, unless the organization in question has highly qualified
in-house technicians to support the OS. You need someone to fix the OS
urgently if a serious problem develops, and developers who get all pouty
and stop answering the phone if you don't constantly say good things
about their work are dangerously unreliable for support.

Fortunately, FreeBSD is extremely reliable. But if you are using it for
mission-critical production, you need to hire someone who can fix the OS
on the spot if something does go wrong, because you probably won't be
able to get adequate support for it from a third party.

Of course, this is true for several flavors of UNIX, not just FreeBSD.
It tends to militate against open-source software generally. Proprietary
solutions cost a fortune, but their publishers won't stomp off in a huff
just when you need them most.

Fac> So your claim that its a "heavy-duty server" platform is tainted by
Fac> the fact that in order to use the fastest server Mobos, you have to
Fac> use the slower, still-under-development 5.x. Which seems
Fac> counterproductive for an O/S that is trying to establish itself as
Fac> a choice as a server platform.

If you are using the fastest server motherboards, then you can afford to
run an operating system that is a tiny bit slower ... assuming that this
is only a temporary situation, of course. If 5.x _never_ achieves
parity with 4.x for performance, that's a much more serious problem.
New release families should always be more performant than old release
families (and don't bother to tell me that it can't be done, because I
know it _can_ be done).

One reason I've moved away from Windows is that it has consistently
bloated over its lifetime, making every new release slower than its
predecessors, and I'm not getting enough with each new release to
justify the loss of performance.
--
Anthony
Paul Schmehl
2005-01-14 21:42:02 UTC
Permalink
--On Friday, January 14, 2005 10:32:08 PM +0100 Anthony Atkielski
Post by Anthony Atkielski
This is, IMO, the single greatest obstacles to using FreeBSD in
corporate and mission-critical environments, and it's the main reason
why I'd be extremely hesitant about recommending FreeBSD in such
environments, unless the organization in question has highly qualified
in-house technicians to support the OS. You need someone to fix the OS
urgently if a serious problem develops, and developers who get all pouty
and stop answering the phone if you don't constantly say good things
about their work are dangerously unreliable for support.
Not to pick a nit...well, ok...to pick a nit...developers do not support
systems. Support organizations do. If you're going to be using FreeBSD in
a corporate environment then you need to find a good *support* company that
can backstop your local admins. *Then*, if a problem arises, the support
company can deal with the developers.

Linux is a good example. Entire companies have arisen merely for the
purpose of supporting the code that's written by Torvald's et. al.
Torvalds doesn't support "Linux". He works with the kernel developers.

Another example - I doubt a single developer who's ever written a line of
code for MS has handled a support call. I wouldn't expect them to.
They're developers. MS has an entire support team for that (they can
afford it, of course.)

So, complaining that the developers don't have the right attitude is a bit
off the mark. Find a local company that is *committed* to supporting
FreeBSD, and you will find the same level of support you get from RH, MS,
or anyone else in the business. The only difference is, support is
"disconnected" from development in the FreeBSD model whereas it's one and
the same company with MS.
Post by Anthony Atkielski
Of course, this is true for several flavors of UNIX, not just FreeBSD.
It tends to militate against open-source software generally. Proprietary
solutions cost a fortune, but their publishers won't stomp off in a huff
just when you need them most.
Nor would any *decent* support company.

Paul Schmehl (***@utdallas.edu)
Adjunct Information Security Officer
The University of Texas at Dallas
AVIEN Founding Member
http://www.utdallas.edu
Anthony Atkielski
2005-01-14 21:59:56 UTC
Permalink
Paul Schmehl writes:

PS> Not to pick a nit...well, ok...to pick a nit...developers do not
PS> support systems. Support organizations do. If you're going to be
PS> using FreeBSD in a corporate environment then you need to find a
PS> good *support* company that can backstop your local admins. *Then*,
PS> if a problem arises, the support company can deal with the
PS> developers.

I'm not sure that this is much of an improvement.

Still, one of the strengths of FreeBSD is that it rarely requires
support. It's better to have reliable software with little or no
support than it is to have unreliable software with superb support. But
in situations where you _must_ have support, just in case, you're often
forced into accepting the latter. This is one argument in favor of
overpriced proprietary solutions like Windows: Windows may give you a
lot more trouble, but at least you can get support--for a price, alas!

PS> Linux is a good example. Entire companies have arisen merely for the
PS> purpose of supporting the code that's written by Torvald's et. al.
PS> Torvalds doesn't support "Linux". He works with the kernel
PS> developers.

Linux has the same problem as FreeBSD in this respect; all open-source
projects do. Third-party support is certainly an improvement, but it's
still not the same as proprietary support.

One important difference is that you can sue a proprietary publisher if
the software fails and he does not respect his support commitment; as
publisher of the software, he can be _compelled_ to fix it or pay you
lots and lots of money for failing (or refusing) to fix it. With
third-party support, this doesn't quite work--you can sue for failure to
perform on the support aspect, but you can't force the third party to
provide a fix, because it's not their code.

PS> Another example - I doubt a single developer who's ever written a
PS> line of code for MS has handled a support call. I wouldn't expect
PS> them to. They're developers. MS has an entire support team for that
PS> (they can afford it, of course.)

Some developers do occasionally intervene on support issues, but it is
true that developers do not answer the phones and don't work on support
calls as a general rule. That would be extremely expensive and
inefficient from a business standpoint, and developers would probably
leave the company as well (support is really boring). It would
guarantee that problems actually get fixed, though, which is not the
case with the current technical support arrangement (mostly based on
trial and error--just as it is for most other companies).

PS> So, complaining that the developers don't have the right attitude is
PS> a bit off the mark. Find a local company that is *committed* to
PS> supporting FreeBSD, and you will find the same level of support you
PS> get from RH, MS, or anyone else in the business. The only difference
PS> is, support is "disconnected" from development in the FreeBSD model
PS> whereas it's one and the same company with MS.

That's a critical difference, unfortunately. It breaks the chain of
accountability. MS can _force_ problems to be fixed (and can be forced
by others to fix problems) because it owns the code and the developers.
Third-party support organizations can't do this.

It's all a matter of business rather than technical issues, but it can't
be ignored when choosing an OS for large-scale or mission-critical
deployment. All of the open-source solutions suffer from this problem.
Lack of accountability doesn't matter as long as the software shows no
bugs, but it's a nightmare if something goes wrong--and the mere
possibility of that happening can rule out an open-source solution for
some applications.

PS> Nor would any *decent* support company.

True, but third-party support companies don't own the code.
--
Anthony
F***@aol.com
2005-01-14 18:21:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Len Zettel
Post by F***@aol.com
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
Not necessarily. The interesting question hasn't been addressed yet.
Is 5.3 on its fastest supported chipset faster or slower than 4.10 on
its fastest supported chipset?
----
Thats a sad commentary, if the "new" version of FreeBSD is 5% faster on
a hardware platform that should be 30% faster. Is that the goal you seek?

so you have to pay 50% more to get the same performance on 5.3. Thats
quite a selling point!
Nikolas Britton
2005-01-14 18:46:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by F***@aol.com
Post by Len Zettel
Post by F***@aol.com
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
Not necessarily. The interesting question hasn't been addressed yet.
Is 5.3 on its fastest supported chipset faster or slower than 4.10 on
its fastest supported chipset?
----
Thats a sad commentary, if the "new" version of FreeBSD is 5% faster on
a hardware platform that should be 30% faster. Is that the goal you seek?
so you have to pay 50% more to get the same performance on 5.3. Thats
quite a selling point!
Is that you ***@aol.com?, whats TM for btw, Troll Master?
F***@aol.com
2005-01-14 18:22:22 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/14/05 8:12:09 AM Eastern Standard Time,
Post by Ramiro Aceves
People on the FreeBSD and Debian GNU/Linux mailing lists are very
kind and help you in any case, if you ask questions politely and you
have searched and read tha manuals first.
So, why do we start always the war? The real war should be against
the Bill Gates OSes, instead of fighting among us. I have never heard
The "war" is not against anyone, particularly against commercial O/Ss.

The truth is that FreeBSD has lost their way. They started out with a focus
on Intel platforms and a solid and dedicated development team. Now they
have lost some of their top talent in development, and they are trying to
support too many platforms with a skeleton force. They simply are not
in position to compete in a "war" of any kind.

The "war" should be to do what you do better than anyone else, however
small the niche. FreeBSD has lost sight of what it wants to be, through a
lack of focus and conviction, by spreading themselves too thin over too
many platforms. Once FreeBSD was THE choice on an i386 platform. Its
now in danger of becoming just another cool O/S, which is a darned shame.
F***@aol.com
2005-01-14 18:43:02 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/13/05 9:05:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Post by Jerry McAllister
Someone who begins with their first post on the questions list with
invective and insults instead of asking a question will, not surprisingly,
not receive much positive response. People here are interested in
getting questions answered and problems solved. They are not
interested in responding to juvenile attacks
------
You really don't know what you're talking about Jerry (as usual), so
why make comments when you never seem to understand the context?
He asked a question and the response was "why dont you donate your
hardware to a freebsd developer".

What's "juvenile" is that all of you "guys" would rather spend your time
insulting people than finding solutions to problems. Thats what kids do.
Jerry McAllister
2005-01-14 19:00:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by F***@aol.com
In a message dated 1/13/05 9:05:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Post by Jerry McAllister
Someone who begins with their first post on the questions list with
invective and insults instead of asking a question will, not surprisingly,
not receive much positive response. People here are interested in
getting questions answered and problems solved. They are not
interested in responding to juvenile attacks
------
You really don't know what you're talking about Jerry (as usual), so
why make comments when you never seem to understand the context?
He asked a question and the response was "why dont you donate your
hardware to a freebsd developer".
He preceded and followed his questin with insults and that was the bulk
of his post.

The response of suggestion he contribute is the normal and reasonable
one for a volunteer supported system such as FreeBSD. Your intent
to spread ignorance on the issue is unhelful. Your calling names
is wasted on some of us and likely to get negative responses from
others.
Post by F***@aol.com
What's "juvenile" is that all of you "guys" would rather spend your time
insulting people than finding solutions to problems. Thats what kids do.
Spoken like a pro.
We are waiting for you to contribute a solution.

////jerry
Duo
2005-01-14 19:06:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by F***@aol.com
You really don't know what you're talking about Jerry (as usual), so
why make comments when you never seem to understand the context?
He asked a question and the response was "why dont you donate your
hardware to a freebsd developer".
What's "juvenile" is that all of you "guys" would rather spend your time
insulting people than finding solutions to problems. Thats what kids do.
Hold it right there bucko. What comes to mind here is, when people point
one finger at someone else, there are three more pointing back at you. The
only one who dosent know what they are talking about here, would be you.
And, at this point, I would surmise, it's you who's trolling for a flame
war, more than boris.

I cite:
http://www.mail-archive.com/freebsd-***@freebsd.org/msg88107.html

In which:

A) The developers, people who DONATE their TIME to develop something
available for FREE were called "stupid", for what? The crime of working on
5.3, the future, as opposed to DROPPING EVERYTHING IN THE WHOLE damned
world to fix ONE PERSON's minor issue.

B) Ted Mittelstaedt's comment of "Donate your hardware" is simple to
understand, if you have neurons even capable of firing. As a matter of
fact, you convienently leave out what others have mentioned, if it dosent
work, you can loan or donate hardware. And, what's more, everyone else
understands that, except for two people:

You and Boris.

The only people doing any of the insulting, are:

You and Boris.

The only person calling anyone names, a truly childish behavior in its own
right are...three guesses...

YEP.

You and Boris.

Back when I discovered Free Operating systems, I came to the
understanding, that, if something dosent work, you have some options:

1) Fix it yourself.
2) Get someone as much tangible data as possible so the problem can be
fixed.
3) Loan or donate some of the offending hardware to a developer so it can
be fixed.

Numerous issues in the early days of LinuxPPC were fixed this way.
Especially in the area of mac's transitioning from oldworld to newworld
ROM booting structures.

So, please, spare us your sermon on the mount, about how FreeBSD has lost
its way, about how it sucks, its not number one in your eyes, we know, we
heard you the first 32,734,129,121,996 times. It's a free OS, with no
warranty. Boris's frustration would have been better channeled into the
following phrase:

"What can I do to get you the information you need to fix, or help me fix
the issue"

But, instead, he chose to call people stupid, insult them for the work
they are trying to accomplish, and insulting them for not dropping their
lives, and other things to fix his problem. Boo hoo. Ill dig you a trench,
and you can then cry me a river.

All support systems have cracks. And people sometimes slip through. Thats
a fact of life. One Boris, and it seems, you need to come to grips with.
No machine, be it one that supports users, or one that runs applications
are perfect. They break, they can error.

In such cases, you have a number of options:

1) Do what you can to fix it.
2) Go elsewhere.

barring those two options, would you please, please please stop being a
sock puppet for Boris? It's old, annoying, and the oldest doom and gloom
cry in the world.
--
Duo
Butterworth, Thaddaeus (Manpower Contract)
2005-01-14 20:49:52 UTC
Permalink
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Friday, January 14, 2005 11:43 AM
Subject: Re: Thank you!
In a message dated 1/13/05 9:05:49 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Post by Jerry McAllister
Someone who begins with their first post on the questions list with
invective and insults instead of asking a question will, not
surprisingly,
Post by Jerry McAllister
not receive much positive response. People here are interested in
getting questions answered and problems solved. They are not
interested in responding to juvenile attacks
------
You really don't know what you're talking about Jerry (as usual), so
why make comments when you never seem to understand the context?
He asked a question and the response was "why dont you donate your
hardware to a freebsd developer".
What's "juvenile" is that all of you "guys" would rather spend your
time
insulting people than finding solutions to problems. Thats what kids
do.
_______________________________________________
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"freebsd-questions-***@freebsd.org"




Gary,
I sent this to your other address as well because I know that you said
you don't check your aol one much. I just have a small personal favor to
ask. Could you please just stick to one email address? On the subject of
FreeBSD I'd like to be able to filter out your replies, since you don't
really add much to the discussion (unlike the great one you had on that
other forum about circumventing New York Cities residence tax, you had a
lot of very useful information there), but I still need to be able to
receive email from some members of aol


Thanks in advance
F***@aol.com
2005-01-14 22:03:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Charles Swiger
Post by F***@aol.com
The entire point of this extended discussion, for those who have paid
attention, is that FreeBSD 4.x, which is admittedly the fastest version
available, DOES NOT work with intel's fastest CPUs because it doesnt
support the necessary chipsets,
Let's pretend for a second that what you've claimed here is completely
accurate rather than exaggerated for rhetorical purposes.
today is?
-------
We don't have to "pretend", because Robert Watson, has outlined the
issues with 5.x networking on this list, and he is in a position to know.

The continued "what are you doing" is part of the problem. Its not reasonable
to expect end users to support the OS as the chipset level. Thats why there
is a core team. Tasks involving the inner guts of the O/S are beyond
the capabilities of even the most talented of programmers without a
significant
learning curve. Its the kind of answer given by people with no answers.

FreeBSD often uses its "centralized" decision making structure as the reason
that they are superior. Yet when something doesn't work its someone else's
problem. That, in a nutshell, is the problem. They beat their chests when
applauded and point fingers when criticized.
F***@aol.com
2005-01-14 22:13:31 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/14/05 1:54:19 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Post by F***@aol.com
So your claim that its a "heavy-duty server" platform is tainted by the
fact that in order to use the fastest server Mobos, you have to use the
slower,
still-under-development 5.x. Which seems counterproductive for an O/S
that is trying to establish itself as a choice as a server platform.
As was pretty clearly explained in previous threads, FreeBSD 5.x is
slower than 4.x *at certain tasks under certain conditions* because
it is rather considerably more featureful and complex than 4.x
----
Unfortunately, one of those "tasks" is networking, which is required by
every server that I know of. As Mr. Watson pointed out, 5.x has significant
"per-packet" inefficiencies. Servers are judged by their capacity, which
is a per-packet issue. Which means that, as a "server", 5.x is 25-30%
less efficient than 4.x. Inefficient, for you high-schoolers, means "slower"
in this context.

It helps if you understand the big picture.
F***@aol.com
2005-01-14 22:36:25 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/14/05 2:05:07 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Post by Kris Kennaway
It's too bad he's now choosing to be even more antisocial
by changing his email address to avoid the procmail filters of those
for whom his rantings have lost their amusementKris
No, I've changed my address because the faggot at catwhisker.org keeps
removing me from the list.

Why doesn't someone just answer the question? When Watson finally
admitted publically that 5.x has networking issues it ended the last
discussion. Just answer the question.

Why are you abandoning support for new hardware in 4.x
when you admit that 5.x is not ready? It makes no sense at all.

Is there some payday down the road for someone? Volunteers or not,
there is some agenda beyond whats
being stated. FreeBSD "team" doesnt seem to give a rats butt about
the user base. Their motivations are not to the users, it clearly to
some corporate sponsor agenda that has nothing to do with end users.
It USED to be to the user base. Now the user base is just a bunch of
guinea pigs to test the "new" os which is still 2 years away. If you
want to engage in a 3 year project to fix SMP, you dont subject the
user base to 2 years of using a hacked up O/S in the process while
abandoning the one that works.

All of the hackers lists have gone private, there is no "discussion" of
what issues are important with the customer base. And all of you
bubbleheads are just pleased as punch that your USB printer works.
Its really quite unbelievable.
Kris Kennaway
2005-01-14 22:55:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by F***@aol.com
In a message dated 1/14/05 2:05:07 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Post by Kris Kennaway
It's too bad he's now choosing to be even more antisocial
by changing his email address to avoid the procmail filters of those
for whom his rantings have lost their amusementKris
No, I've changed my address because the faggot at catwhisker.org keeps
removing me from the list.
So, as I said, you're being antisocial.

Thanks for confirming that you're deliberately evading the filters, in
violation of the AOL terms of use.
Post by F***@aol.com
Why are you abandoning support for new hardware in 4.x
when you admit that 5.x is not ready? It makes no sense at all.
Jamie, you have a fundamental lack of understanding about how the
FreeBSD community works. Unfortunately, this isn't something that can
be explained to someone like you, because you have your own fixed
ideas about how you think the world works and are not willing to
listen to any explanations of how reality differs.

Kris
Erik Norgaard
2005-01-15 00:06:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by F***@aol.com
Why doesn't someone just answer the question? When Watson finally
admitted publically that 5.x has networking issues it ended the last
discussion. Just answer the question.
Focusing on one cludge is meaningless - who cares if your network is a
little slow, or just slower than 4.x if disk or server apps can't keep
up with it anyway? 4.x, 5.0-2 and DragonFlyBSD all suffer from the GIANT
cludge. PHK has done a lot of work to resolve this cludge, all results
may not be in 5.3.
Post by F***@aol.com
Why are you abandoning support for new hardware in 4.x
when you admit that 5.x is not ready? It makes no sense at all.
This is very obvious: There are limited resources: The time of the
developers is precious. Keeping an old system updated costs time and
takes away resources to address the remaining issues with the new version.

In every realworld project there comes a point where you have to release
the project even if it is not perfect or near perfect. Microsoft do this
all the time, and they can't even claim they don't have the money to
boost development.

At some point it becomes meaningless to try to keep the old version
updated. The BSD-team - like it or not - has chosen that this point is
about now.

If you disagree you have the following choices: 1) Use something else,
2) fork your own project or 3) be happy with the decision and provide
usefull feedback to the developers to help the progress of the development.
Post by F***@aol.com
Their motivations are not to the users, it clearly to
some corporate sponsor agenda that has nothing to do with end users.
Prove that - that statement is completely unbiased. Maybe read Eric
Raymonds "The Cathedral and the Bazaar" although BSD is not so much a
bazaar, development is most often triggered by scratching your own itch.
Not the users' nor any corporation.
Post by F***@aol.com
All of the hackers lists have gone private, there is no "discussion" of
what issues are important with the customer base. And all of you
bubbleheads are just pleased as punch that your USB printer works.
Its really quite unbelievable.
There is no customer base - only users who choose to use BSD because
they think it is the best choice for whateever their problem is. If you
have a problem that *BSD does not solve for you, develop the solution or
pay someone to do it or use whatever solves your problem and be happy
with that solution. You have the freedom to choose.

If you think FreeBSD is hostile to it's userbase, go have fun on
***@openbsd.org - this is supposed to be the user list, a catchup list
for anything that doesn't fit on the other lists. It's fun :-) just
don't propose any "improvement" unless you're a core-developer or you
get flamed, burned and cut into little pieces.

Cheers, Erik
--
Ph: +34.666334818 web: www.locolomo.org
S/MIME Certificate: http://www.locolomo.org/crt/2004071206.crt
Subject ID: A9:76:7A:ED:06:95:2B:8D:48:97:CE:F2:3F:42:C8:F2:22:DE:4C:B9
Fingerprint: 4A:E8:63:38:46:F6:9A:5D:B4:DC:29:41:3F:62:D3:0A:73:25:67:C2
F***@aol.com
2005-01-15 00:27:44 UTC
Permalink
In a message dated 1/14/05 7:07:41 PM Eastern Standard Time,
Post by Erik Norgaard
Post by F***@aol.com
Why doesn't someone just answer the question? When Watson finally
admitted publically that 5.x has networking issues it ended the last
discussion. Just answer the question.
Focusing on one cludge is meaningless - who cares if your network is a
little slow, or just slower than 4.x if disk or server apps can't keep
up with it anyway? 4.x, 5.0-2 and DragonFlyBSD all suffer from the GIANT
cludge. PHK has done a lot of work to resolve this cludge, all results
may not be in 5.3.
Post by F***@aol.com
Why are you abandoning support for new hardware in 4.x
when you admit that 5.x is not ready? It makes no sense at all.
This is very obvious: There are limited resources: The time of the
developers is precious. Keeping an old system updated costs time and
takes away resources to address the remaining issues with the new version.
-----
I'd question your categorization of 4.10 as an "old system". Its the current
system that works optimally. Its only "old" because you've purposely
antiquated it.

If you read Mr Watson's explanation you'd know that its not a "kludge".
There are fundamental algorithms in the O/S proper that are being redone.
"networking performance" is not a kludge. Its fundamental to usability
of the O/S as a server.

I understand that resources are scarce, but you are risking losing a
significant and important part of your user base for reasons that
seem questionable. Linux is light years ahead in SMP and now you're
risking your advantage in uniprocessor performance. You're risking
disappearing from the map altogether, IMO.

Thanks for answering the question.

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...