On Saturday, 30. May 2009 08:16:53 olafbuddenha...@gmx.net wrote: > > Does "everyday use" imply use as desktop OS? Or does it just say "this > > is not only for some specific projects"? > > Not sure what you mean by "desktop OS"...
I mean an OS I can put on my desktop computer and use for my dauntingly
important privat tasks like listening to music, watching movies, idling over a
compile or diving into loosely related wikipedia articles instead of learning
for my exam :)
> Perhaps we should say "production use" instead? Though I fear that some
> people would construe that as focusing on professional users, which is
> not the point at all...
I like "everyday use" :)
"ready for production use" is something I know from programs as a measure of
stability, not utility :)
> > What's the difference between "general-purpose" and "everyday use"?
...
> And that's really the important point: While there are several
> multiserver systems available for the embedded market, AFAIK there is
> not a single general-purpose system using such an architecture ready for
> production use. In fact, the Hurd comes closer to this goal than any
> other system I know...
If this holds true, then this is also a really good marketing argument :)
(if some in hjere cringe on the word marketing, just call it "get people
interested" instead ;) ).
And I just spotted something missing: The word "free" :)
The mission of the Hurd project is: to create a *free* general-purpose
kernel suitable for the GNU operating system, which is viable for
everyday use, and gives users and programs as much control over their
computing environment as possible.
But that's about it. All else seems sound and strong to me.
Does it appeal to everyone who's currently coding on the Hurd?
Best wishes,
Arne
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
- singing a part of the history of free software -
http://infinite-hands.draketo.de
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
