>
> I am not sure netbsd wants to be a 'more frendly than it is already' OS.
> Just simply because lots of Oses fit already that description. It is not
> elitism, it is just for those people who rather have the installation


NetBSD IS friendly but it doesn't LOOK friendly.

as opposed to Windows, RedHat (or Dead Rat as someone prefer) and much
others that are NOT friendly, but LOOKS friendly.

of course with RedHat it can be very friendly if you pay for tech support
:) the more you pay the more friendly it will be (or still - it will look
like this)

> leaving the system in a 'virgin' aka not automatically configured state.
> Some people do want to tweak their config files by hand and launch
> services by hand. Some people do fear that one day everything will be so
> catered / user friendly / thought for you already, that we might just
> loose our 'way' to do things. Some people do think that having a GUI
> user friendly installer will not be a 'progress'. There must be an OS
> for those people. It seems to me that NetBSD fits that description.

i'm such a human. it's NetBSD and FreeBSD. NetBSD is best for me in
friendlyness.

FreeBSD is technically better in things i need (no flame war please) but
it's modular kernel, supercomplicated boot loader and "more friendly"
installed is what i don't like...