Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!uwm.edu!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!news.uoregon.edu!netline-fddi.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!nic-nac.CSU.net!newshub.sdsu.edu!saturn!larryr
From: larryr@saturn.sdsu.edu (Larry Riedel)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Linux vs. FreeBSD
Date: 25 Jun 1995 04:06:54 GMT
Organization: San Diego State University, College of Sciences
Lines: 133
Message-ID: <3sind0$6r7@pandora.sdsu.edu>
References: <3qfhhv$7uc@titania.pps.pgh.pa.us> <3sb2sr$rl8@pandora.sdsu.edu> <3sd2ml$16e@pandora.sdsu.edu> <3sdm7m$fh@park.uvsc.edu> <3sfcvp$12n@pandora.sdsu.edu> <3sgvl2$hdf@park.uvsc.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: saturn.sdsu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Terry Lambert (terry@cs.weber.edu) wrote:
> > This *is* the FreeBSD advocacy group! :)
>
> No, it's not. There isn't one.
Advocacy seems as "misc" as anything else in this newsgroup - maybe more! :)
> > > > I don't see that it takes any less time to read N mail messages
> > > > than N USENET articles,
> > > ...
>
> There is a hidden assumption that you will be able to read only the
> things which are relevent, as a matter of choice.
No there isn't - as I have said several times now, I was talking
about inherent efficiencies of reading the same information as
USENET articles vs. mailing list messages, not what information
would be in a newsgroup vs. a mailing list.
> > I said that I don't see
> > that it takes less time to read N mail messages than N USENET
> > articles. My only "assumption" was that N was same for both.
>
> It's not. 8-).
I believe that in statements phrased the way mine was:
I don't see that it takes any less time to read N mail messages
than N USENET articles,
it is generally understood that N is intended to be defined as a
constant throughout the statement.
> > I don't have a price cutoff for elitest, because I don't even use the
> > term, and I don't see why sending, e.g., 50 2kByte mail messages is
> > significantly less costly than sending 50 2kByte USENET articles, so
> > consequently I don't see how USENET is inherently any more elitest
> > than a mailing list or requires a better "net connection."
>
> 50 x 2k / 1 group = 100k (avg)
> 50 x 2k / 10 lists = 10k (avg)
>
> 10k << 100k
But I did not say anything about the number of groups or lists.
50 x 2k / 10 groups = 10k (avg)
50 x 2k / 1 list = 100k (avg)
10k << 100k
:)
Whether or not on June 23, 1995 there happened to be one newsgroup for
FreeBSD and 10 mailing lists was independent of what I said, since I
was only talking about the inherent efficiencies of sending the same
information as USENET articles vs. mail messages, not what information
would be in a newsgroup vs. a mailing list.
> > > Which is better for the user, knowing with 100% certainty that
> > > they can ask "someone in charge" (very elitest concept, by the
> > > way) question "A", or an OS that precludes them having to ask
> > > question "A" in the first place?
> >
> > Since that is not (IMO) the tradeoff, and neither goal can be
> > achieved anyway, I don't think answer is relevant.
>
> I didn't ask relative to achievability (a realistic approach
> would acknowledge that not all questions may be answered in any
> case), I asked relative to goal.
It looked like an either/or question to me - not a relative one.
Relative to goal, I think it would depend on the cost of providing
each, so I don't think there is always the same correct answer.
> > > > My personal opinion as far as FreeBSD goes from what I have
> > > > seen in this newsgroup is that too much emphasis has been
> > > > placed on pandering to neophytes,
> > >
> ...
>
> Then redirecting *all* neophytes to mailing lists (like the
> neophyte in question) is acceptable practice
Absolutely, if FreeBSD does not want to have a reputation for providing
support of the users by the developers that is equal or superior to that
of Linux, but I think it does!
>
> [ ... stnadard "answer-getting" protocol deleted ... ]
>
> > The world would be a much better place if everyone knew and followed
> > these protocols. I think few enough people do that if in another
> > group for another OS a different protocol is more often followed -
> > users post to the newsgroups and get answers right there from
> > developers and other users - then some people will migrate to that
> > OS instead of FreeBSD.
>
> Uh, that was nearly verbatim "Nettiquite".
What about the people who do not follow "Nettiquite" - is FreeBSD
too elitest to accommodate them? ;^)
> > > It is a big, big mistake to equate "Usenet" and "Internet".
> >
> > Like this?
> >
> > > > All of a sudden I find the truth that these geographically
> > > > challenged people have the time but are hapless victims of
> > > > USENET elitism! (:
> > +------^^^^^^
> > | > AMEN, BROTHER! HALLELEUYAH!
> > | >
> > | > FREE NETWORK CONNECTIONS FOR THE (M)ASSES!
> > +---------^^^^^^^
> > :)
>
> No. USENET is a store-and-forward network that occasionally uses
> the internet for transport. "Network" is the correct terminology.
Then people who have access to mailing lists have enough of a "Network"
connection to have access to USENET; so there is nothing more "elitest"
about asking for USENET access than mailing list access.
Larry