Why Should You Use FreeBSD? Here's Some Reasons

[kraftman]

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.

No, you didn't and you even agreed later... What a dumb.

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

HFS+ only journals meta-data. Journaling support was retrofitted into HFS+ via a simple VFS journaling layer in XNU that’s actually filesystem independent. The journal files on an HFS+ volume are called .journal and .journal_info_block (type jrnl and creator code hfs+). HFS+, although not a cutting-edge filesystem, supports some unique features and has worked well for Apple.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compari...stems#Metadata

Just compare this crap to ext4. And about case sensitivity:

Although often believed to be case sensitive, HFS Plus normally is not. The typical default installation is case-preserving only. From Mac OS 10.3 on the command newfs_hfs -s will create a case-sensitive new file system. HFS Plus version 5 optionally supports case-sensitivity. However, since case-sensitivity is fundamentally different from case-insensitivity, a new signature was required so existing HFS Plus utilities would not see case-sensitivity as a file system error that needed to be corrected. Since the new signature is 'HX', it is often believed this is a new filesystem instead of a simply an upgraded version of HFS Plus.

[ninez]

It seems you don't have a clue as usual. I didn't have search for a long:

http://ardour.org/

Sadly, Ardour2 while very stable is not at feature parity with ANY mdoren DAW. Ardour3 is in Beta, is not stable (i would know i build it at least 1-2 times a week). You had to 'search' i am already well-aware. My comment still stands, nice try though.

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/

...and yet you can't even name one IDE for linux that has similar modern feature set. Mixxx is a decent app, but it's not for Vjing. In case you don't know what VJ means, it means Visual jockey ie: mixing video and sound. and even still Mixxx isn't as good as similar apps for Mac for djing, it's not at feature parity and in reality lies somewhere in the middle.

[ninez]

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.

They are so similar that fat32 doesn't support even have of the same features as HFS+. (go compare file-systems at wikipedia, they are not similar) nice try. Furthermore, if a file-system works for the purpose of what it is designed for - than what is the problem. And did i say anything about EXT4 before it was production ready, no i did not. i said in it's earlier days, there is a difference.

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.

So you think, but don't actually know their real motivations.

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.

Actually, it matters when it started to be used. You have been using HFS+ (non-extended) as a reason current day MacOSX sucks, yet this file-system isn't even in use and hasn't been for a decade, aside from on legacy systems.

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

It's not only according to disk utility it is according to many partitioning utilites, Mac or not.

It's funny how you keep posting these, when we've already been over this shit. The user decides on installation of MacOSX what their partitions will be and if they are case-insensitive or case-sensitive. It's that simple.

An HFSX volume can be case sensitive or case insensitive. Case sensitivity (or lack thereof) is global to the volume. The setting applies to all file and directory names on the volume. To determine whether an HFSX volume is case-sensitive, use Disk Utility to examine the format of the disk.

What don't you understand? You keeping citing users who don't seem to realize they made the choice in having a case-insenstive HFS+ partition. That is called 'human-error'. The problem is the person, not the technology.

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.

I don't have to play prophet to see that Ubuntu relies on Debian and sticks (largely) to their policies. What makes me think you aren't seeing the differences between Ports and ABS? because you keep comparing them, when they are actually fairly different you didn't even know you could change version numbers in ports, among other things you've said.

Again, you can assert that Apple hires 'no one good', but you have nothing to back that up with, at all. Intel and Apple do have a partnership, it isn't a matter of me trying to boost their reputation - Intel is the only platform supported by MacOSX and they have a profitable working relationship and will continue too, for the foreseeable future.

What do you mean by close relationship? IBM doesn't give a shit about apple when comes to their OS.

Once upon a time, IBM and Apple had a working relationship and IBM produced PPCs for Apple. This changed when Apple ported MacOSX to Intel and began doing business with them. Clearly, you don't even know some basic history here/.

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.

Well, i provided some examples all you can say is 'bullshit, bla bla bla'. how funny. Apple is the preferred platform for lots of this stuff. And if there are so many equivalents than how come you couldn't even list 1 (let alone listing Linux equivalents...lol

And Linux is very strong on mobiles, servers, hpc etc. but it seems Apple can't go further than mobiles.

Actually, for certain markets Apple goes for in mobile - it does kill linux. Walk into any Music store (where they sell proaudio gear) and have a look around at how many proaudio companies are designing hardware specifically to be interfaced/integrated with iOS ... I do think Linux is doing great in mobile, but iOS at this point has way better apps than something like Android - with some exceptions (of course).

Ever heard of yaourt? Wow, do you really think I don't know about this?

By asserting that repos are 'better', yeah, i felt it was something to point out. Like i said, you are comparing Apples to oranges. and AFAIK youart is just a front-end for use with the AUR, one of many available. Why you are comparing it specifically to ports, i am not exactly sure.

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.

It makes it a headache, when they have made a human error, for sure. As for as linus, you did feel you needed to plea to an authority (to say otherwise now, is bullshit). And again, if it is utter crap - than how come it works, with little or no issues. (when setup properly). I'm sorry that you think this is providing concise technical data to support you postion, but it is not, and i have no choice now but to mark your opinions on the matter as invalid.

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.

So by shitload, you mean transgaming (one example). LMFAO.. nice try, though.

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.

If you are talking about servers, etc, sure. But as far as Desktop applications, i haven't found anything significant on linux that can out do the same sort of application for Mac. And not even having a good video editor for linux is pathetic, when OS 9 had better facilities for this kind of thing (as one example).

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 still stand by what i said - you are a fucking idiot ~ linux-fanboy chump.

[ninez]

No, you didn't and you even agreed later... What a dumb.

Apparently, you can't read;

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.

and...

Okay, so *if* it emulates journaling and posix and both work...

I wrote both comments before he posted. Way to make yourself look in dumber. *face palm*

[JanC]

Race cars also don't have automatic gearbox.

Modern race cars have an electronic gearbox; whether or not it shifts gears automatically is entirely dependent on how you program it.

[ninez]

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?

Forgot to address this. there are lots, and don't you find it interesting that Digikam was the only real option you could come up with (and i agree digikam is decent). But I have far more (potentially better) options with MacOSX. Some obvious ones;

Aperture, adobe stuff (lightroom, photoshop), Pixelmator, etc. There's also many freebies (you can google all this shit yourself, though) and obviously you can easily build Digikam, gimp, cinepaint, etc on a Mac via fink/macports and i think there may actually be a version of gimp that uses cocoa, although i've never used it, personally.

The fact that i can run most of the software i would be running in Linux, on my Mac Desktop is nice, as well. So even if you were to sit here and argue by comparison, it is a moot point because on a Mac you can run most *nix apps, anyway. But putting that aside, Digikam isn't as good, and is not at feature parity nor usability to some software available for Mac. It's not like i haven't looked at this myself, being as i have both sitting in front of me.

[LightBit]

Modern race cars have an electronic gearbox; whether or not it shifts gears automatically is entirely dependent on how you program it.

Yes having both ways is good, but it's very hard to disable all automation in Linux distributions and it's posssible to enable some automation in FreeBSD.

[finalzone]

Yes having both ways is good, but it's very hard to disable all automation in Linux distributions and it's posssible to enable some automation in FreeBSD.

Linux from scratch, Slackware, Gentoo, Arch Linux. To be frank, why do you really want to disable all automation?

[LightBit]

Linux from scratch, Slackware, Gentoo, Arch Linux. To be frank, why do you really want to disable all automation?

Because it's harder to configure it, than do it manually. I'm mounting manually since hal deprecation.

[0xBADCODE]

Yes having both ways is good, but it's very hard to disable all automation in Linux distributions and it's posssible to enable some automation in FreeBSD.

You can build your LFS and get what you want, if you need that . But you see, automation is used because it's just convenient when machine offloads routine boring tasks from humans. That's why most of humans would prefer a better way of doing things so most popular distros are offloading boring and monotonous technical tasks to machine. It's computers who should serve humans, after all.

So when selecting between "hard to disable" (Linux) and "hard to enable" (most BSDs) it's logical that I would choose Linux. And it's well known that it's easier to break (unwanted) things than construct something new :P