On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 02:08:59PM -0700, Andy Ruhl wrote:

> On Wed, 20 Oct 2004 08:29:06 -0400, D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy@netbsd.org> wrote:
> > As a policy we don't compare ourselves to others but rather explain our
> > own strengths and invite people to compare us to the alternatives
> > themselves.  I happen to think that that is a good policy.
> > 
> > I certainly think that we should submit our release announcement to /.
> > along with everyone else that we send it to.
> 
> There seems to be this sense among people that if you don't have some
> obsure platoform, then there's no reason to use NetBSD. Where does
> this come from?

$ cat /usr/share/games/fortune/netbsd | grep propaganda # ;)

> There's also some other sense that, since OpenBSD was spawned from
> NetBSD, NetBSD must be insecure. Where does this come from?

$ cat /usr/share/games/fortune/netbsd | grep propaganda # ;)

> Those internet land speed record articles seem like a good place to start?

Oh, it has, a little of propaganda in the default system ;).

Well, another good point to start could be the crosscompile-framework, that will
at latest be realized by the folks when NetBSD 2.0 gets finally released although
this could be sublimated under the "portability" term.

Another point, that FreeBSD is more "widely" known for, is stability.

I use several -current systems over a greater time period (of around a year) as
productive systems without having greater problems.

> Andy

-- 
hernani