So, if FreeBSD is NOT LInux then it's not stable, not reliable and it's not simple. There are also no automated tasks, so I'm stuck with legacy OS. It's Linux that is used in EVERYTHING and FreeBSD is ONLY used on some servers, but Linux OWNS servers, so this person lives in some fanboy's world. Nobody uses FreeBSD in enterprise computing, because it's not mature enough (even if it's much older...).- FreeBSD is NOT Linux = FreeBSD is stable, reliable, simple (there are no automated brainfucks... like udev, hal and dbus in base system)
OpenBSD, FreeBSD, NetBSD [put another crapBSD here].- Not fragmented as Linux, (relation to many distro, that not have idea/goal)
What community? Few devs and few users? What a bunch of crap.- The community - Unlike Linux which is very fragmented by all the different flavours and hence individual communities, FreeBSD has one community who are always happy to help with hints tips and advice. This simply cant be beaten!
That's disputable. They don't have comparable developers that are so good in scheduler thing and locking mechanism.Few, but better.
Gentoo is the answer. Portage is just great :-)
(Bonus feature: Portage 2.2 is now at alpha108 - and before the alpha phase it was marching up to rc99 or more)
Last edited by mazumoto; 05-31-2012 at 05:01 PM.
I'm not opposed to using FreeBSD for a server, but who can seriously use it for a desktop? Things you need just aren't available. Unless your needs are extremely modest, and by that I mean, you just sit at a shell and use pine as your email and vi as your text editor. You can't use any actually good desktop apps. And the configuration experience is a nightmare exactly because they don't have auto-configuration stuff like udev and pulseaudio and systemd.
we can all agree that it sucks donkey balls on the desktop. the contention is whether is has some "killer" features on the server. my opinion is that freebsd doesn't have any great features that set it apart other than zfs (which has a sick feature set for the enterprise). even with zfs, linux mops the floor in terms of sheer number and momentum. the tutorials and support on the net for just centos or debian alone are mountains to a molehill compared to, say, openbsd or netbsd. not counting the driver situation, which is pretty bad.
freebsd is a good lesson for desktop linux advocates who think that turning a LAMP stack into a desktop operating system is a few tweaks and polish and ignore the huge efforts involved in making a windows/osx alternative.
You can also configure HAL ... on FreeBSD.
ULE seems to be good for server.
And don't forget about Dragonfly BSD.
Last edited by LightBit; 06-01-2012 at 03:06 AM.