Your point was that BSDs share kernels. That's not true, as the BSD being talked about in the article all use different kernels.
Also, you said they share packaging systems. That's true to a much lesser extent than you implied, it's just that DragonflyBSD uses netpkgsrc (and maybe OpenBSD too, I don't know).
PC-BSD is just a distribution of FreeBSD, not another BSD.
With that said, the only significant things that the BSD community appears to lack at the moment are KVM, Network Manager, some wireless drivers and some graphics drivers, all of which could easily be ported if key Linux developers were to join the BSD community. If Linux developers joined the BSD community to do that, end users would be better off.
Last edited by ryao; 11-13-2012 at 11:05 AM.
What I'm saying, is that there's strength in numbers.
The opening line:
Then we should work together, instead of working separately.For the average user, the difference is surprisingly small
Drivers! What they need are drivers or at least don't break working ones with an update.
Old SATA I controllers are not supported, newer ones are not supported and the one I found in the middle doesn't work properly since 8.3 any more.
Since I got a bloody nose with FreeBSD, it worked 1 year, then upgrade to 8.3 and tried ~6 months to get it working again (you cannot downgrade back to 8.2 since zfs is not compatible -.-). I am back on Gentoo Linux with that box and no data loss in the zfs pools.
Last edited by disi; 11-13-2012 at 11:15 AM.
What I'm saying is probably somewhere between the law of diminishing returns, and the law of marginal utility.(considering where the OSS user base is at) As I said just a moment ago, there's strength in numbers.
But even though I think that BSD has the upper hand based on some of the principles you laid out, the notion(and even the original article states this in the opening paragraph) that it's "bsd vs linux" is weird to me. It's OSS vs Microsoft and/or other corporations who seek to either make us dependent upon their sub-par(or even faulty) wares, over charge, or other such nonsense.
Last edited by ryao; 11-13-2012 at 11:26 AM.
However, most devs realize their own visions on the various BSDs. That's why there is not one single BSD OS.
For example, Matt Dillon wanted a diferent approach to SMP on FreeBSD, but he wasn't allowed to(or whatever), so he forked FreeBSD and created DragonflyBSD.
You won't get him or anyone working on it to develop for Linux.
Same with OpenBSD, you sure as hell won't get Theo de Raadt to give up his vision on having the best security, which he can only realize with an own OS.