Page 10 of 12 FirstFirst ... 89101112 LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 113

Thread: Why Should You Use FreeBSD? Here's Some Reasons

  1. #91
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    809

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Who cares what such crappy file system could do in 1998? Ext4 kills this crap in every sane way. Only idiots will use hfs+ with few Tera byte files. Thankfully, such idiots don't exist. hfs+ is terribly broken.
    So terribly broken, that i don't know who has ever had a single problem with it. I can't say the same of EXT4 in it's earlier days.

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    No, but you look like a stupid to me. I didn't claim they deleted all of the BSOD posts.

    It seems the problem lays in your head.
    You said they delete posts like that, and yet they exist, including the one you cherry picked and linked too. (a BSOD on Mac can mean either Blue Screen of death - which you linked too ... or a BLack Screen of Death - which is a kernel oops / failure). As i said before *they may be logical reasons for them to delete posts*, based on their forum policies (as many forums do). And regardless, you still in the face of technical info that contradicted your bullshit, moved the goal post. it's that simple.

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    No, but it seems you're so moronic that you don't get obvious things. The talk was about hfs+ if you still don't get it. It's hfsx that allows you to do such thing.
    You know hfsx is older than your link, right. HFS+ (extended) was introduced in 10.2 or 10.3 - that is 2001 or maybe 2002 ... So even back then, this problem didn't exist (only 10.1 and 10.2.0 didn't support hpfs+ extended). The article you linked to (Dave winter's) was 2008. it's has been a decade since HFS+ has been in use, dude. it was deprecated by Apple a long time ago. So what are you telling me, that Apple's (long) deprecated file-system is shit then, the problem is that that file-system was no longer in use. it would be like me arguing irrelevant non-sense about DOS vs. win2000 or something stupid like that... Keeping this in mind, and the fact that people commonly refer to HFS+ as MacOSX's file-system and the fact that HFS+ (non-extended) hasn't been in use for years and the fact you link to articles from 2008 - it would make sense that you were talking about HFS+ (extended). Unless, it is common place for you to make arguments for obselete technology against modern (relevant) tech ... but it is more likely you just trying to move the goal post, again...

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    I believe he understands much more than you do. Looking at your ugly picture it seems when you decide OS X to be case-sensitive the hfsx is being chosen. It's such simple.
    Again, you must not know much about disk utility - in order to be able to view that screen, i had to go through the beginning process of creating a partition. That picture shows what the patitions would have been, not what is actually on my system. But why i am i telling you this, you're the expert right?

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    You don't have a clue about OS X partitions, so "you're a fucking idiot!" pal.
    And yet, in this post and every other post i have found things you have said to be factually *incorrect* ...

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    You should ask Jobs in the past, because he did care. You're a stupid OS X fanboy that knows nothing about OS X. That's a shame. Those others are working for IBM, Red Hat, Novell, Oracle, Intel and they don't give a shit about your toy OS. Looking at OS X as a whole I wouldn't risk my reputation to work on it. They probably feel the same.
    I don't think you have the skills to work on an OS, especially when you don't even understand the basic stuff, and can't even spot differences between things like ports and ABS. You're ideas about Ubuntu adopted things that they never will, also shows a lack of understanding of some pretty baisc stuff too.You think you have a reputation at stake for this kind of thing...lol - why don't you just send a company all of your inaccurate false claims about shit that you know nohing about - i am sure they would be greatly impressed. and AFAIK Intel and Apple have a very close relationship, and have done things like developed 'thunderbolt' together. As for Linus, Red Hat, etc - they have a different ideology/philosophy than Apple, and obviously it makes sense that some of the people they hire wouldn't want to work for Apple - but i doubt these are 'technical' reasons... In fact, i would probably say they aren't. it comes down to social/ideological issues.

    IBM and Apple also had a very close relationship for many years, but hey you should already know that, since you know so much, right?

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Thankfully it's Linux that's taking all of this. It will take some time, because there's software missing sometimes, but it's natural it will replace OS X. There are no best applications only for Mac or better with Mac.
    Adobe's products are all better on Mac than Windows (and every graphic/web designer i know would agree). How about Osirix? all of our clients (in the pharma industry) who are technicians would disagree with you, big time; http://www.osirix-viewer.com/index.html ... How about Syphon; http://syphon.v002.info/ logic Pro is Mac only and Protools runs better on Mac. How about the mountains of Professional plugins (audio and/or visual) that are only made for Mac?? You think MaxMSP isn't as good as pure data? (that would be funny, to hear)... Clearly, you've never done actual comparisons yourself. While i actually have...

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    I know, because they're lost. The only market they can keep pushing is desktop and mobile. Other markets stay out of their range.
    Mobile is the fastest growing market. I think they are doing just fine. And Again, server market is never something they went for in any big way. So i don't even see the point to your comment, i would they the company would be more lost trying to take that market...

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    hfsx. ArchBuild is similar to ports and it's far better for me. The same about Gentoo. However, the best are Linux repositories.
    Ports and ABS aren't similar. Portage and ports are but ABS no, that is incorrect - you've been told this by several people now. furthermore, comparing build-systems to repositories is like comparing apples to oranges ~ they serve (potentially) very different purposes, for different users. Repo's are good if you only want to deal with binaries and have a system that isn't optimized for your hardware, and if you want convenience (of not having to build software). build-systems provide a level of customization (such as patching, custom build options, etc) and optimization.

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Why? I think I'm right, so why should I shut up? To let you keep dreaming, apple boy? I promised little more about how crappy hfs+ is. It's not only using POSIX emulation, but it seems it emulates journaling as well.
    Okay, so if it emulates journaling and posix and both work - what exactly is YOUR specific problem with it?? PLease, provide concise *technical points* that have merit and the data to support your opinions - failing to do so, as far as i am concerned means this argument is a failure. Hating an FS because you hang off every word Linus says, is not good enough - Linus hates on a lot of shit, but he isn't the litmus test of what is good and bad in technology.

    furthermore, any emulated layer is for the BSD part of the Mach_kernel, and as i said if it works - then what the fuck is the problem?

    As for being an Apple-fanboy. I use Apple (Macbook Pro) but my main Desktop is Archlinux, which is my preferred platform - that being said, they is a shit load of stuff you can not do in Linux that you can easily do in MacOSX, there are a ton of applications that have NO comparable alternative in Linux. I also have to be able to test (for work) on ALL major platforms (WinXP/7, MacOSX/iOS, Linux/android, and blackberry devices). So i have very valid reasons to be running multiple OSes including MAcOSX.

    The sad fact of the matter is that Linux is years and years away from being able to let me do things that i have been able to do in MacOS since MacOS 7 or MacOS 9 ... That doesn't make me a fanboy, it makes me realistic, pragmatic and sensible to use the tools that i need to accomplish the things i need to do.

    You on the other hand, are just a linux-fanboy chump - and you still have been wrong about all of this shit. Calling me a troll does nothing to improve that situation for you.

    I feel sorry for you that you are actually this stupid.

    have fun pretending that you actually know what you are talking about.
    Last edited by ninez; 06-03-2012 at 08:24 PM.

  2. #92
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    809

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kraftman
    Thankfully it's Linux that's taking all of this. It will take some time, because there's software missing sometimes, but it's natural it will replace OS X. There are no best applications only for Mac or better with Mac.
    ..and to add to this, being as i didn't cover linux specifically. There isn't even a single DAW for linux that at this point is at feature parity / quality / usabliity to GarageBand (which i would never use for creating music). There is still not a single good video editor for linux that compares to any for Mac. There is still no IDE that is at feature parity, is as modern and that is as good as Xcode. There is no VJing type tools for linux that even touch Mac titles. There isn't a single photo-editing suite for linux that is even moderately comparable to those available for Mac... and there are just a few small examples.

    And this isn't me hating on linux, i can't wait until linux catches up, but in at least a few areas i could be waiting for years (as i have been for many already).

  3. #93
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ninez View Post
    There is still no IDE that is at feature parity, is as modern and that is as good as Xcode.
    Wow... not so fast, while I would not talk about rest of your list, but Xcode is actually pretty shitty. It uses a lot of RAM (comparable to about any java written IDE), on top of that it is unstable, has very slow documentation search, constantly leak memory on top of that its editor is plainly ugly, switching between many edited files is inconvenient and tabs support is just unusable.
    After switching to JetBrains AppCode as my main iOS development IDE I'm as happy as developer could be, using Xcode only for UI staff.

  4. #94
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    It's not only using POSIX emulation, but it seems it emulates journaling as well.
    How is possible to emulate journaling?
    It's optional which is good for flexibility.

    Also case sensitivity has nothing to do with file system design.

  5. #95
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    809

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blacknova View Post
    Wow... not so fast, while I would not talk about rest of your list, but Xcode is actually pretty shitty. It uses a lot of RAM (comparable to about any java written IDE), on top of that it is unstable, has very slow documentation search, constantly leak memory on top of that its editor is plainly ugly, switching between many edited files is inconvenient and tabs support is just unusable.
    After switching to JetBrains AppCode as my main iOS development IDE I'm as happy as developer could be, using Xcode only for UI staff.
    My comment still stands, while Jetbrains Appcode may be better than XCode - it is a Mac Only application. My comment was specifically discussing IDE's for linux (vs. Mac options) ...and your comment plays perfectly into what i was saying, since Kraftman is arguing that there are no mac-specific apps nor any that work better under OSX.
    Last edited by ninez; 06-04-2012 at 12:29 PM.

  6. #96
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    809

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    How is possible to emulate journaling?
    It's optional which is good for flexibility.
    This i am also curious about, i don't get that ~ which is why i have asked him to provide some relevant concise information that supports his position.

    I can't find any technical information that backs up his claims ~ which leads me to believe he is just talking out his ass.

  7. #97
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    61

    Default

    Reasons to use FreeBSD ...

    Non-technical reasons:
    Well, for one, it's UNIX-like (first boot gives the terminal). That's good if you're a UNIX user. Many Linux distributions (and PC-BSD) are more Windows-like despite being built atop UNIX-like Linux. I believe that X11, Gnome, KDE, etc... are separate programs and not core system programs. Secondly, it's highly configurable out of the box. There's no Enterprise Server, Workstation, etc... build. It's great for UNIX users. FreeBSD is more like legos while Windows and many Linux distributions are more like pre-assembled toys (Workstation, Server, etc...). Great documentation. A Windows user with no UNIX experience can learn FreeBSD by reading the short and concise FreeBSD Handbook.

    Technical reasons (more targeted toward Linux):
    Userspace API is better documented (kernel API documentation is almost non-existent). Man pages routinely give substantially more than two sentences of description as well as examples.
    sysctl ... procfs and sysfs are awful in my opinion. It's even worse when software grabs system information with fopen() and fread() ... makes you think Linux is built out of cardboard boxes.
    Seamless wi-fi integration. I find iwconfig really silly ... but these horrid details are often hidden from Linux users.
    ZFS (for now, BTRFS looks promising).
    Ports. A lot of software is only configurable at compile time. I also appreciate headers and libraries being installed as the authors intended (rather than have all of these stupid devel packages to install parts of the software). Compiling sucks, but modern hardware pretty much makes this a non-issue. I also think ports is better than, for example, RPM, yum, etc... I never used Debian's package management though.
    I've griped about other reasons. I sure don't remember them though ... must not be important.

    As to GPL and BSDL ... Imagine yourself as one of the mathematicians who developed LAPACK decades ago. You wrote software that hobbyists, students, researchers and corporations would use in applications ranging from trivial to industrial-strength. Your code would even be relied upon to ensure the safety of human lives. GSL (for example) will never experience this type of glory because, contrary to belief, it is not free to use. It will never be industrial strength because no corporation will ever use it in real applications. GSL (among others) is a pipe dream for software hippies.

    Imagine yourself as one of the authors of the BSD network stack. Your code would be the reference standard for TCP/IP communication for decades. OS developers ranging from hobbyist to corporate would incorporate your code into software ranging from hobbyist to industrial-strength for decades to come. No one will ever adapt the Linux network stack into industrial strength operating systems (except for Linux).

    You may not get paid for your work (though you are recognized for it), but free and useful code spreads more readily and without restraint into all sorts of applications even more so than GPL code.

    Unfortunately, there are not many UNIX users. It's quite the learning curve in a Windows world. Even though FreeBSD makes a productive desktop, it finds itself in server roles, embedded systems, and some specialty roles. While not well known, it does find itself used for great and impressive applications. As far as I know, Yahoo still runs on it. It also runs in some HPC appliances like Panasas blades (that's pretty cool).

  8. #98

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    How is possible to emulate journaling?
    It's optional which is good for flexibility.
    You should ask morons from Apple. It is done in BSD emulation layer and this affects performance for sure.

    Also case sensitivity has nothing to do with file system design.
    Who knows? It can be another emulation layer on top of the crappy hfs+. There's hfsx for a reason.

  9. #99

    Default still no clue

    Quote Originally Posted by ninez View Post
    ..and to add to this, being as i didn't cover linux specifically. There isn't even a single DAW for linux that at this point is at feature parity / quality / usabliity to GarageBand (which i would never use for creating music). There is still not a single good video editor for linux that compares to any for Mac. There is still no IDE that is at feature parity, is as modern and that is as good as Xcode. There is no VJing type tools for linux that even touch Mac titles. There isn't a single photo-editing suite for linux that is even moderately comparable to those available for Mac... and there are just a few small examples.

    And this isn't me hating on linux, i can't wait until linux catches up, but in at least a few areas i could be waiting for years (as i have been for many already).
    It seems you don't have a clue as usual. I didn't have search for a long:

    http://ardour.org/

    xcode is pure shit compared to what Linux has, so don't make yourself to look even more stupid. There's digikam which is OpenSource and it's very good photo editing tool. Care to name some photo editing suites for Mac, so I will be able to compare them? When comes to VJing there's

    http://www.mixxx.org/

  10. #100

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ninez View Post
    So terribly broken, that i don't know who has ever had a single problem with it. I can't say the same of EXT4 in it's earlier days.
    Like I said I'm not talking about end users who just use it on desktops. hfs+/hfsx are comparable to fat32, but even fat32 is probably much better designed. Ext4 in its early days wasn't production ready and ext4 is not only used on desktops, so this makes it much more trusted file system.

    You said they delete posts like that, and yet they exist, including the one you cherry picked and linked too. (a BSOD on Mac can mean either Blue Screen of death - which you linked too ... or a BLack Screen of Death - which is a kernel oops / failure). As i said before *they may be logical reasons for them to delete posts*, based on their forum policies (as many forums do). And regardless, you still in the face of technical info that contradicted your bullshit, moved the goal post. it's that simple.
    They were deleting bsod related posts on their forums and I don't give a shit about their policy. They probably stopped when they realized they can't hide the issue. Afaik the main problem was bsod after some patch or upgrade. It's such simple.

    You know hfsx is older than your link, right. HFS+ (extended) was introduced in 10.2 or 10.3 - that is 2001 or maybe 2002 ... So even back then, this problem didn't exist (only 10.1 and 10.2.0 didn't support hpfs+ extended). The article you linked to (Dave winter's) was 2008. it's has been a decade since HFS+ has been in use, dude. it was deprecated by Apple a long time ago. So what are you telling me, that Apple's (long) deprecated file-system is shit then, the problem is that that file-system was no longer in use. it would be like me arguing irrelevant non-sense about DOS vs. win2000 or something stupid like that... Keeping this in mind, and the fact that people commonly refer to HFS+ as MacOSX's file-system and the fact that HFS+ (non-extended) hasn't been in use for years and the fact you link to articles from 2008 - it would make sense that you were talking about HFS+ (extended). Unless, it is common place for you to make arguments for obselete technology against modern (relevant) tech ... but it is more likely you just trying to move the goal post, again...
    I don't care when they were introduced. The fact is hfs+ isn't case sensitive and it was something I was talking about with Deanjo. Don't try to hide this now. In case you forgot it's you that brought very old post and that's why I linked to such an old article, so don't try to play a smart guy now.

    Again, you must not know much about disk utility - in order to be able to view that screen, i had to go through the beginning process of creating a partition. That picture shows what the patitions would have been, not what is actually on my system. But why i am i telling you this, you're the expert right?
    hfs+ isn't case sensitive, but extended hfsx version is (but according to your crappy disk utility it's being called the same...). hfs with journaling is recognized as hfsj, so it looks case sensitivity is another emulation layer which is something terryfing, because it looks like journaling and case sensitivity were added later on top of the hfs+... Now you have a picture why Linus called it an utter crap. It's also not sure what one should use, because he will end with problems in both cases:

    http://docs.info.apple.com/article.h...sa76d058e.html
    http://my.opera.com/ismailp/blog/200...-unix-mac-os-x
    https://github.com/finworks/smallsource/issues/15

    And yet, in this post and every other post i have found things you have said to be factually *incorrect* ...
    I disagree.

    I don't think you have the skills to work on an OS, especially when you don't even understand the basic stuff, and can't even spot differences between things like ports and ABS. You're ideas about Ubuntu adopted things that they never will, also shows a lack of understanding of some pretty baisc stuff too.You think you have a reputation at stake for this kind of thing...lol - why don't you just send a company all of your inaccurate false claims about shit that you know nohing about - i am sure they would be greatly impressed. and AFAIK Intel and Apple have a very close relationship, and have done things like developed 'thunderbolt' together. As for Linus, Red Hat, etc - they have a different ideology/philosophy than Apple, and obviously it makes sense that some of the people they hire wouldn't want to work for Apple - but i doubt these are 'technical' reasons... In fact, i would probably say they aren't. it comes down to social/ideological issues.
    What makes you thinking I don't see differences between ports and ABS? yaourt makes it much better for me. Don't play in a prophet, because you don't know what Ubuntu will do in the future (but I didn't even said they will...). The stuff is very easy to understand. Apple is a toy company that has no clue about serious things. Don't even try to make their reputation better by mentioning Intel, because Intel does a lot more to Linux. It's not only about philosophy, but about business as well. Nobody good will work for Apple, because there are much better options. Apple makes a desktop OS and it can't be called a professional one.

    IBM and Apple also had a very close relationship for many years, but hey you should already know that, since you know so much, right?
    What do you mean by close relationship? IBM doesn't give a shit about apple when comes to their OS.

    Adobe's products are all better on Mac than Windows (and every graphic/web designer i know would agree). How about Osirix? all of our clients (in the pharma industry) who are technicians would disagree with you, big time; http://www.osirix-viewer.com/index.html ... How about Syphon; http://syphon.v002.info/ logic Pro is Mac only and Protools runs better on Mac. How about the mountains of Professional plugins (audio and/or visual) that are only made for Mac?? You think MaxMSP isn't as good as pure data? (that would be funny, to hear)... Clearly, you've never done actual comparisons yourself. While i actually have...
    Bullshit. Some of them may prefer to work on Apple rather than Windows, but it doesn't make products better. There are many equivalents on Windows that simply kills the crap.

    Mobile is the fastest growing market. I think they are doing just fine. And Again, server market is never something they went for in any big way. So i don't even see the point to your comment, i would they the company would be more lost trying to take that market...
    And Linux is very strong on mobiles, servers, hpc etc. but it seems Apple can't go further than mobiles.

    Ports and ABS aren't similar. Portage and ports are but ABS no, that is incorrect - you've been told this by several people now. furthermore, comparing build-systems to repositories is like comparing apples to oranges ~ they serve (potentially) very different purposes, for different users. Repo's are good if you only want to deal with binaries and have a system that isn't optimized for your hardware, and if you want convenience (of not having to build software). build-systems provide a level of customization (such as patching, custom build options, etc) and optimization.
    Ever heard of yaourt? Wow, do you really think I don't know about this?

    Okay, so if it emulates journaling and posix and both work - what exactly is YOUR specific problem with it?? PLease, provide concise *technical points* that have merit and the data to support your opinions - failing to do so, as far as i am concerned means this argument is a failure. Hating an FS because you hang off every word Linus says, is not good enough - Linus hates on a lot of shit, but he isn't the litmus test of what is good and bad in technology.
    The point is it makes developers a headache sometimes (like above...), it slows it down and makes it a mess. Linus usually knows what he's talking about and I don't have to quote him, because I know hfs+ is an utter crap.

    furthermore, any emulated layer is for the BSD part of the Mach_kernel, and as i said if it works - then what the fuck is the problem?
    The same as above and messed up cluster.

    As for being an Apple-fanboy. I use Apple (Macbook Pro) but my main Desktop is Archlinux, which is my preferred platform - that being said, they is a shit load of stuff you can not do in Linux that you can easily do in MacOSX, there are a ton of applications that have NO comparable alternative in Linux. I also have to be able to test (for work) on ALL major platforms (WinXP/7, MacOSX/iOS, Linux/android, and blackberry devices). So i have very valid reasons to be running multiple OSes including MAcOSX.
    There's also a shit load of stuff you can easily do in Linux and can't do in OS X. For example it's much easier to run Windows games under Linux.

    The sad fact of the matter is that Linux is years and years away from being able to let me do things that i have been able to do in MacOS since MacOS 7 or MacOS 9 ... That doesn't make me a fanboy, it makes me realistic, pragmatic and sensible to use the tools that i need to accomplish the things i need to do.
    The funny fact is OS X probably won't ever allow me to do things I do in Linux now. It makes me "realistic", pragmatic and sane to use something which works better for me.

    You on the other hand, are just a linux-fanboy chump - and you still have been wrong about all of this shit. Calling me a troll does nothing to improve that situation for you.
    I'm not and it's who called me fucking idiot etc. I'm basing on facts and you're basing on fanboism. That's a difference.

    I feel sorry for you that you are actually this stupid.
    You should feel sorry about you.

    have fun pretending that you actually know what you are talking about.
    I have fun reading your apple boy comments as well.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •