On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 10:30:44AM -0500, Daniel Feenberg wrote:
>
>
>
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
>
> >On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 4:55 AM, Daniel Feenberg <feenb...@nber.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>On Mon, 19 Nov 2012, Polytropon wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 06:00:29 -0500, Jerry wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>On Mon, 19 Nov 2012 11:43:06 +0100
> >>>>Polytropon articulated:
> >>>>
> >>>> Allow me to provide just one example:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> More in the series of bizarre UEFI bugs
> >>>>>
> >>>>> http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/**20187.html<http://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/20187.html>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>The only way for FreeBSD (or Linux, for that matter) to survive
> >>in a world where hardware vendors care only about Windows, is
> >>to make sure that FreeBSD only depends upon features that Windows
> >>uses. If a hardware or firmware specification requires feature X,
> >>but Windows doesn't use feature X, then vendors won't test feature
> >>X, and FreeBSD can't depend on it being functional. So it shouldn't
> >>be required by FreeBSD. It can be used, provided it isn't required.
> >>In this case it may mean that FreeBSD must identify itself as
> >>Windows, just as all browsers identify themselves as IE.
> >>
> >
> >
> >The above paragraph is completely meaningless , because neither *BSD , nor
> >Linux
> >is a marginal operating system .
> >
> >Please see
> >
> >http://www.top500.org/statistics/list/
> >
> >
> >Select from this "Operating System Family"
> >where in world's 500 super computers , Windows is on ONLY 3 computers , the
> >rest is
> >almost Linux 469 , Unix 20 , BSD-based 1 computers and others .
I'll take a bow, or part-of, for the BSD computer. Maybe I
shouldn't. 1/500 is nothing to put on my tombstone:-)
> >http://www.asus.com/Static_WebPage/OS_Compatibility/
> >http://www.asus.com/websites/global/aboutasus/OS/Linux.pdf
> >contains Linux distributions supported in ASUS desktop boards .
> >
> >Some trade marked servers excluded , Linux and *BSD run on many server
> >hardware .
> >
>
> It isn't what vendors should care about. I agree they should care
> about FreeBSD. But by and large they don't. Arguing that they should
> serves no purpose. They have poor moral character, that is why they
> don't care and also why they are impervious to argument, except from
> large customers. The handful of server vendors that are exceptions
> do not detract from the force of my argument.
>
> daniel feenberg
answer me this, daniel or anybody else:: isn't there a very small
group who is devoted to creating a 100% open/free hardware and
software? maybe 64-bit only to start? most of us who are still
alive and contributing *something* might be interested in this.
forget where I read it, but unless I was dreaming, it was for real
and would fit the "OPen-*" model... .
gary
--
Gary Kline kl...@thought.org http://www.thought.org Public Service Unix
Twenty-six years of service to the Unix community.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
