Just because its beta doesn't mean it can be swiss cheese. You can't write the browser completely wrong, and then just before its released magically add security to it. You have to write the code securely from the start, which obviously they aren't doing.
You haven't said anything new for them to hear. This was all said years ago. And it was all responded to years ago. Nobody cares what some random slashtard with no clue thinks. They know what has and has not worked, and what does and does not increase their funding. You do not. Hence, they ignore your bullshit.
GoDaddy have always been MS shills. They've always touted their Windows hosting as superiour the linux. Their tech people don't know anything about linux, and try to sell you windows hosting when you have a problem with their pathetic linux offerings. Years ago when I saw them advertising how much more secure their windows hosting is compared to linux, I moved all my stuff away.
That's an awful lot of typing to just say "I'm too stubborn and self-richeous to admit that perhaps the people running OpenBSD know more about OpenBSD than me", which is all you needed to say.
"The ISO you pointed at is too small to be a self contained full copy of the OS (which usually is over 200 MB in size); a full copy of the OS on one or more ISO's is what I've been talking about as it allows for independent installs away from the network as well as being easier to the user."
Yeah, I know when I worked at an ISP we pretty much never had internet access, so installing over the network just wasn't an option. Seriously what a crock. And its not easier at all, as I said you press "f" or "h" instead of "c", and then pick a number from a list of mirrors instead of putting in a filesystem path. You are talking out of your ass, and anyone who's ever installed OpenBSD knows it.
Your comment reflects upon your inability to grasp simple facts.
"The link you point to is a "4,662 KB" file and is not a full ISO of the entire OS, and as such isn't what I was talking about."
You said they needed to be able to download an ISO, burn it, and do an install. That ISO will do it for you just fine. You are saying that because you have to press "f" or "h" instead of "c" that the ISO is no good?
"It's not all that relevant who believes that users who simply use the system aren't contributing since that's just an opinion. However, if it's true that Theo and his crew think that then it's no wonder why people aren't contributing. Anyone who uses the system is a legimitate user otherwise OpenBSD should have a different license such as you can only use it if you contribute to it, but wait, that's not in the license so it's too late to add that."
WTF are you babbling about? You said "OpenBSD needs more users so they will make more money". I said "no, as Theo has pointed out repeatedly, they have already gotten WAY more users than before, and the number of people buying CDs and donating has not gone up with it". This has nothing to do with licenses, or people's opinions. This is simply you stating complete and utter nonsense, and me telling you that it is complete and utter nonsense.
"The more people the better."
Except that's complete and utter nonsense, as has been pointed out many times, and you simply refuse to listen. But I'm sure you know OpenBSD's finances, number of users, downloads vs cd purchases, etc much better than Theo does right?
"Ah, they did try to download OpenBSD and burn it but they gave up as they were in an urgent rush and complained to me that there should be an ISO for OpenBSD! Download time was not a factor in the decision, the lack of an ISO was. This really happened last November."
There is an ISO. There was last November too. I guess maybe they are retarded?
"In your opinion they don't. In my opinion they contribute by being users of the system. They have the potential of contributing directly to the project and I offer my respect to them for being users of OpenBSD."
No, in the opinion of Theo et al, the guys who know exactly how many people are downloading, buying cds, and donating. Nothing to do with my opinion at all.
"If OpenBSD (i.e. Theo and crew) need cash to continue operations then they should start up an annual funding drive such as WikiPedia does."
Kinda looks like they did doesn't it? We are discussing it here on the "news for nerds and BSD doesn't exist" site.
"To not have a downloadable or bit toorentable ISO for a free operating system (and to charge money for it) is pure folly. Make it easy and bring on the hordes!"
"I submit to you that it would help OpenBSD a tremendous amount since more users mean more people are likely to support them financially."
I submit to you that you should learn to read. The number of openbsd users has gone up an order of magnitude in the last few years. These new people do not donate, or buy cds. They do not help the project in any way. Pretending that you know better and that more users will be good doesn't change the actual facts.
"Downloading and burning an ISO image is very easy and quick for anyone. Downloading directories, wondering if you got them all and how to organize them for burning takes mental effort and looking up the info, also getting the boot file options correct also takes effort; simply put the current ftp file downloads method is inferior to an ISO for people who are less tech savy or for people in a rush."
Its a single directory with no subdirectories and does not require any organizing. Or you can simply burn the provided ISO image and pick a mirror to download the files from instead of specifying a cd path to untar the files from. Wow, that sounds like hard work.
"A major ISP switched from OpenBSD to FreeBSD simply for the reason that it was faster to get FreeBSD installed than OpenBSD. They could download the FreeBSD ISO, burn it and boot it very quickly. Doing the same for OpenBSD just took too long and they gave up."
Yeah, I know of lots of major ISPs that buy underpowered, overpriced, flaky, reboot themselves cisco gear for no reason too. That doesn't mean its smart. They could have downloaded the OpenBSD ISO, burned it and booted it much faster than they could with a FreeBSD ISO (since its so much smaller). But I guess that would have made too much sense.
"I'll just say I completely disagree with the assessment that the code is good quality."
Yeah, a retard who isn't even qualified to assess the quality of code might say that.
"It isn't good quality when it comes to being able to handle difficult situations (it doesn't scale well). It doesn't fail gracefully."
So, you are just making shit up then? Doesn't scale well to large SMP machines? True. Does this have any impact on security and DoS attacks? Of course not. And failing gracefully is done when it should be, and not when it shouldn't. For instance, silently corrupting your data because of a problem might be failing gracefully, and is apparently normal in loonix land, but in the BSD world that means its time to panic(). Sure, your box is down now, but that's preferable to quietly fucking up data.
"It isn't good quality from a usage point of view. It is difficult to use even for people familiar with Unix in general, and the community is filled with dinks who, apparently, take their attitude from Theo."
And obviously you don't know unix at all. OpenBSD is by far the easiest to use, sanest, most managable unix around. Christ, it and loonix distros are the only unixes to even ship with a usable shell by default.
You are correct that OpenBSD isn't in wider use because loonix retards insist on downloading huge ISO images of shit they don't need for everything because they are too stupid to realize that you can transfer files over the network.
But, being in wider use doesn't help OpenBSD financially. They are worse off now then they were before it became so popular. Having fewer users was actually better for them.
And "takes too long to create openbsd install disks"? Seriously, how is burning an ISO image faster than burning a cd with a single directory of downloaded files on it?
How many businesses are actually using linux in production anymore? Not counting the people unknowingly using linux based appliances. I can't remember the last time I heard of someone running production stuff on linux - at least in part because so many of the linux teams ideas being adopted by windows or freely available cygwin.
Pro tip: No he isn't dumbass. He's talking about HP, IBM, Sun, Cisco, Microsoft, etc who all have shitloads of money, all use OpenBSD's code, and all could help fund further development.
In hindsight, do you think it might have been a good idea to add a game to atitd? I know alot more people would have subscribed if there was an actual game to play.
Slashdot Mirror
Err, please stop fueling my silent rage.
Just because its beta doesn't mean it can be swiss cheese. You can't write the browser completely wrong, and then just before its released magically add security to it. You have to write the code securely from the start, which obviously they aren't doing.
You haven't said anything new for them to hear. This was all said years ago. And it was all responded to years ago. Nobody cares what some random slashtard with no clue thinks. They know what has and has not worked, and what does and does not increase their funding. You do not. Hence, they ignore your bullshit.
GoDaddy have always been MS shills. They've always touted their Windows hosting as superiour the linux. Their tech people don't know anything about linux, and try to sell you windows hosting when you have a problem with their pathetic linux offerings. Years ago when I saw them advertising how much more secure their windows hosting is compared to linux, I moved all my stuff away.
I tried that and didn't get modded up at all.
That's an awful lot of typing to just say "I'm too stubborn and self-richeous to admit that perhaps the people running OpenBSD know more about OpenBSD than me", which is all you needed to say.
"The ISO you pointed at is too small to be a self contained full copy of the OS (which usually is over 200 MB in size); a full copy of the OS on one or more ISO's is what I've been talking about as it allows for independent installs away from the network as well as being easier to the user."
Yeah, I know when I worked at an ISP we pretty much never had internet access, so installing over the network just wasn't an option. Seriously what a crock. And its not easier at all, as I said you press "f" or "h" instead of "c", and then pick a number from a list of mirrors instead of putting in a filesystem path. You are talking out of your ass, and anyone who's ever installed OpenBSD knows it.
Your comment reflects upon your inability to grasp simple facts.
"The link you point to is a "4,662 KB" file and is not a full ISO of the entire OS, and as such isn't what I was talking about."
You said they needed to be able to download an ISO, burn it, and do an install. That ISO will do it for you just fine. You are saying that because you have to press "f" or "h" instead of "c" that the ISO is no good?
"It's not all that relevant who believes that users who simply use the system aren't contributing since that's just an opinion. However, if it's true that Theo and his crew think that then it's no wonder why people aren't contributing. Anyone who uses the system is a legimitate user otherwise OpenBSD should have a different license such as you can only use it if you contribute to it, but wait, that's not in the license so it's too late to add that."
WTF are you babbling about? You said "OpenBSD needs more users so they will make more money". I said "no, as Theo has pointed out repeatedly, they have already gotten WAY more users than before, and the number of people buying CDs and donating has not gone up with it". This has nothing to do with licenses, or people's opinions. This is simply you stating complete and utter nonsense, and me telling you that it is complete and utter nonsense.
"The more people the better."
Except that's complete and utter nonsense, as has been pointed out many times, and you simply refuse to listen. But I'm sure you know OpenBSD's finances, number of users, downloads vs cd purchases, etc much better than Theo does right?
"Ah, they did try to download OpenBSD and burn it but they gave up as they were in an urgent rush and complained to me that there should be an ISO for OpenBSD! Download time was not a factor in the decision, the lack of an ISO was. This really happened last November."
s o
There is an ISO. There was last November too. I guess maybe they are retarded?
"In your opinion they don't. In my opinion they contribute by being users of the system. They have the potential of contributing directly to the project and I offer my respect to them for being users of OpenBSD."
No, in the opinion of Theo et al, the guys who know exactly how many people are downloading, buying cds, and donating. Nothing to do with my opinion at all.
"If OpenBSD (i.e. Theo and crew) need cash to continue operations then they should start up an annual funding drive such as WikiPedia does."
Kinda looks like they did doesn't it? We are discussing it here on the "news for nerds and BSD doesn't exist" site.
"To not have a downloadable or bit toorentable ISO for a free operating system (and to charge money for it) is pure folly. Make it easy and bring on the hordes!"
ftp://ftp.openbsd.org/pub/OpenBSD/3.8/i386/cd38.i
I'm probably going to get moderated down for saying this, but slashdot licks ass sweat and Zonk molested my dog.
"I submit to you that it would help OpenBSD a tremendous amount since more users mean more people are likely to support them financially."
I submit to you that you should learn to read. The number of openbsd users has gone up an order of magnitude in the last few years. These new people do not donate, or buy cds. They do not help the project in any way. Pretending that you know better and that more users will be good doesn't change the actual facts.
"Downloading and burning an ISO image is very easy and quick for anyone. Downloading directories, wondering if you got them all and how to organize them for burning takes mental effort and looking up the info, also getting the boot file options correct also takes effort; simply put the current ftp file downloads method is inferior to an ISO for people who are less tech savy or for people in a rush."
Its a single directory with no subdirectories and does not require any organizing. Or you can simply burn the provided ISO image and pick a mirror to download the files from instead of specifying a cd path to untar the files from. Wow, that sounds like hard work.
"A major ISP switched from OpenBSD to FreeBSD simply for the reason that it was faster to get FreeBSD installed than OpenBSD. They could download the FreeBSD ISO, burn it and boot it very quickly. Doing the same for OpenBSD just took too long and they gave up."
Yeah, I know of lots of major ISPs that buy underpowered, overpriced, flaky, reboot themselves cisco gear for no reason too. That doesn't mean its smart. They could have downloaded the OpenBSD ISO, burned it and booted it much faster than they could with a FreeBSD ISO (since its so much smaller). But I guess that would have made too much sense.
"I'll just say I completely disagree with the assessment that the code is good quality."
Yeah, a retard who isn't even qualified to assess the quality of code might say that.
"It isn't good quality when it comes to being able to handle difficult situations (it doesn't scale well). It doesn't fail gracefully."
So, you are just making shit up then? Doesn't scale well to large SMP machines? True. Does this have any impact on security and DoS attacks? Of course not. And failing gracefully is done when it should be, and not when it shouldn't. For instance, silently corrupting your data because of a problem might be failing gracefully, and is apparently normal in loonix land, but in the BSD world that means its time to panic(). Sure, your box is down now, but that's preferable to quietly fucking up data.
"It isn't good quality from a usage point of view. It is difficult to use even for people familiar with Unix in general, and the community is filled with dinks who, apparently, take their attitude from Theo."
And obviously you don't know unix at all. OpenBSD is by far the easiest to use, sanest, most managable unix around. Christ, it and loonix distros are the only unixes to even ship with a usable shell by default.
You are correct that OpenBSD isn't in wider use because loonix retards insist on downloading huge ISO images of shit they don't need for everything because they are too stupid to realize that you can transfer files over the network.
But, being in wider use doesn't help OpenBSD financially. They are worse off now then they were before it became so popular. Having fewer users was actually better for them.
And "takes too long to create openbsd install disks"? Seriously, how is burning an ISO image faster than burning a cd with a single directory of downloaded files on it?
Maybe you should use your money to pay for reading lessons. The BSD license is GPL compatable already.
How many businesses are actually using linux in production anymore? Not counting the people unknowingly using linux based appliances. I can't remember the last time I heard of someone running production stuff on linux - at least in part because so many of the linux teams ideas being adopted by windows or freely available cygwin.
Pro tip: No he isn't dumbass. He's talking about HP, IBM, Sun, Cisco, Microsoft, etc who all have shitloads of money, all use OpenBSD's code, and all could help fund further development.
In hindsight, do you think it might have been a good idea to add a game to atitd? I know alot more people would have subscribed if there was an actual game to play.
Yeah, I guess maybe people with severe brain damage shouldn't be configuring sudo.