[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Two NetBSDs: from Desktop NetBSD needs your help
On 2009-02-07, der Mouse <mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost> wrote:
> Prompted by smb's response to ad's note about "Desktop NetBSD"....
> I'm actually starting to notice a fundamental divide here. There seem
> to be two groups of people (I'm painting with a broad brush here; the
> boundaries are not as sharp as I'm making them sound, but I think this
> characterization is useful enough to think about). One group uses
> "modern" machines (i386, ia64, amd64), sees disk, RAM, and CPU cycles
> as cheap, and wants a "desktop experience", preferably one that looks
> as much like the Windows/Mac/Linux world as possible. The other group
> uses other ports (sandpoint, vax, shark, pmax, the list is long), sees
> CPU cycles, RAM, sometimes even disk space as scarce resources, and is
> perfectly happy with a command line (or occasionally, as in embedded
> systems, no UI at all). Most of the conflicts I've seen within the
> project, recently, are between these two camps. Perhaps we need
> another split? It would certainly cut down on those conflicts and keep
> each group happier, letting them have what they want without constantly
> struggling with the other.
As a desktop user running NetBSD on "modern" (amd64) hardware, I would
find such a split unfortunate. If I wanted a Linux-like user
experience, I would run Linux. The reason I turned to NetBSD was its
clean and light design, which I think is to a large part due to the
constraints imposed by its multi-architecture and multi-purpose
nature. The main area in which I would wish to see improvements is
not desktop experience but drivers and hardware support.
For a while now, NetBSD has been my last refuge against the seemingly
overwhelming tide of bloatware and GUI-centric design. If NetBSD (or
its "modern-hardware" branch) was to become another Linux clone, I
wouldn't know where to turn next.
Main Index |
Thread Index |