I got the answer I expected from the Novell/Sun/Red-Hat people: "regarding market research, we care about it only when happens from our marketing department and to our customers". They don't care about the "generic" Gnome user. That's ok. Understandable. These guys have a business to run.
This seems to indicate that such influence has been co-opted by employers of the Gnome decision makers. Perhaps that's the uncomfortable truth.
"FreeBSD 5.3 ships with x.org, which is **BROKEN**
on
The Case for FreeBSD
·
· Score: 1
...
* FreeBSD's installer has always been, and still is, better than NetBSD's.
* FreeBSD 5.3 ships with x.org, which is **BROKEN**. Sorry, guys, but you don't earn any rating but broken when you can't even produce a usable TWM display on a Radeon 9200.
* XOrg on FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE (or -STABLE, take your pick) still dies on this machine. This indicates that insufficient testing was done before the switch to xorg. Obviously they can't test everything, but a radeon 9200 isn't THAT old!* FreeBSD 5.3 ships with x.org, which is **BROKEN**. Sorry, guys, but you don't earn any rating but broken when you can't even produce a usable TWM display on a Radeon 9200. ...
The furor over the license is generated by commercial interests and little else. Look at where the criticism of the license comes from. Is it a vendor that has sold repackaged XFree86 as a product for years and stands to benefit from calling it their own product?
Once you filter out FUD from vendors, what issues are left?
In my experience as a customer, they live up to all the rave reviews about their support and premium bandwidth.
It's easy to get spoiled when hardware, network and OS issues are virtually non-existent.
The author mentions that there is an alaising issue, but didn't mention that the spacial sampling limits the resolution.
Sure you can crank up the optics, but you've got to anti-alias it and thus remove all the higher spacial frequencies if you want to avoid rining and other artifacts.
Slashdot Mirror
A quote from the 2005/2/22 review FreeBSD vs. NetBSD: ready for primetime?:
...
...
* FreeBSD's installer has always been, and still is, better than NetBSD's.
* FreeBSD 5.3 ships with x.org, which is **BROKEN**. Sorry, guys, but you don't earn any rating but broken when you can't even produce a usable TWM display on a Radeon 9200.
* XOrg on FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE (or -STABLE, take your pick) still dies on this machine. This indicates that insufficient testing was done before the switch to xorg. Obviously they can't test everything, but a radeon 9200 isn't THAT old!* FreeBSD 5.3 ships with x.org, which is **BROKEN**. Sorry, guys, but you don't earn any rating but broken when you can't even produce a usable TWM display on a Radeon 9200.
The furor over the license is generated by commercial interests and little else. Look at where the criticism of the license comes from. Is it a vendor that has sold repackaged XFree86 as a product for years and stands to benefit from calling it their own product?
Once you filter out FUD from vendors, what issues are left?
Even RMS claimed that the new "license requirement qualifies as free software".
RMS also claims that the new licensing policy will "eliminate the (GPL) incompatibility with applications".
It seems pretty clear once you filter out the noise....
Active ports doesn't tell you _which_ service has the port open, but rather that services.exe, etc. process has the port open.
In my experience as a customer, they live up to all the rave reviews about their support and premium bandwidth. It's easy to get spoiled when hardware, network and OS issues are virtually non-existent.
The author mentions that there is an alaising issue, but didn't mention that the spacial sampling limits the resolution. Sure you can crank up the optics, but you've got to anti-alias it and thus remove all the higher spacial frequencies if you want to avoid rining and other artifacts.