Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:2157 comp.os.linux.misc:12092 Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!news.uh.edu!not-for-mail From: cosc19v2@menudo.uh.edu (cosc19v2) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: Impressions: FreeBSD vs Linux Date: 5 Apr 1994 20:32:36 -0500 Organization: University of Houston Lines: 69 Message-ID: <2nt3fk$b0l@menudo.uh.edu> References: <CMzw69.92K@tower.nullnet.fi> <2nm6tb$m6u@klaava.Helsinki.FI> <2nmeb4$ro@menudo.uh.edu> <2nq530$7hh@hecate.umd.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: menudo.uh.edu In article <2nq530$7hh@hecate.umd.edu>, Mark Sienkiewicz <mark@elea.umd.edu> wrote: >In article <2nmeb4$ro@menudo.uh.edu>, cosc19v2 <cosc19v2@menudo.uh.edu> wrote: >> >>I think that installing DOS/UNIX in one disk is quite typical, and >>if you read the volumenous 386BSD FAQ or succinct NetBSD Install guide, >>nothing is clear about it. > >I think it is *also* typical to blow DOS away and hope to never see it >again. WRONG !!! It is not for using or hacking around DOS or UNIX themselves. It is the SOFTWARE that we want to use. Can you tell me how you can run SimCity2000, Typing Tutor, Power Point, Authorware Professional, ...etc. on your *BSD machine ? I think that what is different b/w Linux users and *BSD users is that the former uses DOS/Linux box as a basis for the applications they use every day, and the latter uses *BSD for *BSD hacking (of course, in this case, you don't need DOS and you don't want to see it again). >You may have noticed that many BSD users already have rather strong >biases about what their computer should be like, and it doesn't include >primitive boot loaders pretending to be operating systems. [ :) ] Also, >notice that it seems to be a point of pride to say "My machine has been >up for XX days." That also suggests a lack of DOS. So, while their BSD machines are up for XX days, what do they do with them ? You can say only the software which is ported to *BSD, right ? (Note also that there are much more software ported to Linux than *BSD). Let me explain how my old PC is being used at home. It is used by 3 people. I mostly use Linux, my wife uses Linux for her thesis, and uses Windows for her work. My kid uses it for KID PIX, "Just GRandma and ME", "Athur teacher trouble" CDROMs, and Mario Teaches Typing. We all have fun with Lemmings, and learns some aspect while we play SimEarth, and SimLife. Unlike your (or their) *BSD machines, our PC's uptime is, in many case, less than an hour, since we all want it. So what ? >I think a lot of us don't *want* DOS on our machines, therefore haven't >spent a lot of time figuring out how to make it work. > >This is not to say that I think we should disallow DOS completely. Just >recognize that Linux is getting a lot of the more casual users because >it does a better job at accomadating them. > >Mark S. > >p.s. I liked the Netbsd 0.9 install. It did everything I wanted in a >simple and clear fashion. I guess I'm going to have to go buy a disk >to install Linux on, just to see their install program. :) As I said, installation in a whole drive is no problem. It is as easy as Linux installation. I also thought about installing the *BSD in a whole drive, but I have some useful programs that I already purchased, such as Dictionary program, Grammer correcting program, speed reading training program, typing tutor, and Lemmings, or Pinball games (for break). I really want to use them. And they are not available on any free-*ix platform. You are going to say, "Buy two PCs", right ? :) :) Gees, it is not worth while to deal with this kind of stiff-necked BSD users. Bye, BSD.