Slashdot Mirror
Jan Schaumann Talks About NetBSD on the Desktop
An anonymous reader writes "Continuing his series of interviews, Emmanuel Dreyfus asks NetBSD's Jan Schaumann about his experience with NetBSD on the desktop. From the article: 'Jan Schaumann has been an important contributor to the NetBSD project for several years. He spent a lot of time working on the NetBSD package system, known as pkgsrc, and he currently uses NetBSD as his desktop system. We will try to learn from his experience during this interview.'"
I have been saying this for a long time. Basically to sum it up. Linux (and netbsd) ARE ready for the desktop. Because the end user wouldnt be installing linux, just like they dont install/upgrade windows. Someone else does that, the administrator, or the kid down the street. The administrative details can still lack, but that is immaterial since the person doing the work is already knowledgable (in theory) As long as their is an easy to use GUI available that makes it easy to get to their mail, the web, and possibly type something up, that satisfies most people's requirements.
The phrase "more better" is acceptable English. suck it grammar Nazis
I used NetBSD as my desktop for over two years, and didn't have any usability issues. Thunderbird for e-mail, Firefox for browsing, OpenOffice for the occasional resume tweak. Plus all the "standard" FOSS stuff: Gimp, Apache, Tomcat, Ethereal, gAIM, etc. VLC for the (very) occasional MP3/DVD playback.
Granted, I'm more of a pure software developer (I don't game, and I don't use my machine for "media" too much), but I can't recall a time when I got "stuck" because I didn't have some piece of software available. I believe both KDE and GNOME are available (I used AfterStep), so there shouldn't be too much confusion switching a Windows user over.
Just junk food for thought...
The only problem is that my desktop is a VAX 4000-90
But yes, compared to VMS on the same hardware, NetBSD is WONDERFUL!
I've been hearing myself say that for years, and it's been true. But we're increasingly concentrating more on our data and, the people with whom we exchange it, than on the applications we use to do that. The maturity of "personal computing" has evolved a short list of apps which resemble each other regardless of developer, with similar UIs. But a diversity of architectures, from phones to notebooks to desktops to big iron, often several of which participate in any one transaction across the network. Yet the app paradigm inherently creates boundaries across which people must communicate, which often doesn't work and is always complex - even when "integrated". While cross-platform Web apps and inclusion of millions of "unsophisticated" users create a demand for things to "just work", without requiring "computer" skills in addition to those required by the actual task at hand.
In short, "personal computing" is getting to be like driving: most people can use most cars more or less the same, with different performance and convenience, on standardized roads, to get where we're going - mostly to get to other people. Applications are like cars, desktops are like dashboards, OS'es are like transmissions, networks are like fuel types, and our data is like the open road. MIME and desktop integrations are making that data the center of user activity. So the question is decreasingly whether "the" app you need is available under an OS on given HW. Rather, whether an app more or less automatically is available to work with your data, on whatever OS/HW is available and connected to the Internet. Since most of that data is for working with other people, convergence of voice and other data will make a lot of idiosyncratic SW, and unique skills using it, go the way of the Model T.
--
make install -not war