At 10:02 PM 10/27/98 -0600, you wrote:
>I think this thread is starting to go no where.  Therefore I think we
>should return focus on NetBSD issues.
>
>If Dennis wishes to support NetBSD, that would be great.  Maybe he'll have
>some satisfied NetBSD users with his cards/software and make some money
>at the same time. I was interested in his card way back when, but have
>settled for other solutions. I think Dennis has his own ideas and
>philosophies about business, hardware and software, support,
>documentation, etc.  But they are his and no one is going to change that.
>If you want to go back and search inet-access and freebsd-isp's mailing
>lists regarding etinc and Dennis, then it's only a few clicks away.  There
>you'll find several "heated" discussions about etinc/Dennis, and none of
>those discussions provided any productive results - IMHO.
>
>To be fair to Dennis, those that I know who did get etinc's cards to work
>are pretty happy with the product, but all have said Etinc/Dennis should
>provide for better support and documentation with less attitude.  You
>could easily verify this by talking to those that actually use Etinc's
>cards.

Yeah, this was necessary...I bowed out of this discussion days ago.


>
>So let's conclude this thread.  If Dennis wishes to port his products to
>NetBSD, cool without releasing full or partial source, fine.  If he
>doesn't want to go NetBSD at all, fine.
>
>Oh, and that spin off about FreeBSD/alpha... what's the point of having
>open source if our ego get bruised alittle when others based their OS on
>our port?  Who cares, that's the point of open source isn't it.  But to be
>fair, who ever brought it up should have given some credit to the use of
>NetBSD base codes, but I think he was only trying to say that it does work
>(ie. correcting someone else on the NetBSD list saying otherwise).
>
>So one more time, please stop this thread as it doesn't provide me with
>anything usefull.
>
>..............          ....................................
>Thomas T. Thai          Infomedia Interactive Communications
>tom@iic.net             TEL 612.376.9090 * FAX 612.376.9087
>
>
>On Tue, 27 Oct 1998, David Maxwell wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 1998 at 12:48:02PM -0500, Dennis wrote:
>> > 
>> > But they can, because they can use FreeBSD, which fits your
>> > description, at least in the i386 world which is all that matters to us.
>> 
>> What are the reasons that only i386 matters to you?
>> 
>> I feel many people choose NetBSD on i386 to give them the
>> flexibility of changing the hardware layer out for a higher
>> performance system without loosing everything else. People
>> who are willing to lock themselves into i386s may be just
>> fine with your cards, but I know the machine-dependence
>> of the card would lower it in my favour. Not eliminate it
>> perhaps, but lower it. (for me)
>> 
>> > Clearly your words indicate that you are not interested in having a
widely 
>> > popular OS, which certainly is a major criteria for a vendor.
>> 
>> See my previous message regarding "clearly" and "you".
>> 
>> -- 
>> David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net --> Mastery of UNIX, like
>> mastery of language, offers real freedom. The price of freedom is always
dear,

>> but there's no substitute. Personally, I'd rather pay for my freedom
than live
>> in a bitmapped, pop-up-happy dungeon like NT. - Thomas Scoville 
>> 
>