Slashdot Mirror


Updated FreeBSD Release Schedule

Serin K Medusa writes: "The folks over at FreeBSD.org have put up a new 'roadmap' detailing the plan of action for the remainder of the year. In particular, check out the plans for a 5.0 preview and expected dates for 4.6. Interesting reading if you're following -CURRENT."

49 of 333 comments (clear)

  1. Unua posto! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Esperanto estas bona lingo!

  2. FreeBSD is Dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    I thought FreeBSD is dying? Didn't they go bankrupt?

    1. Re:FreeBSD is Dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

      I don't think that FreeBSD is long for this world. It is not going to survive. IDC said the market share for all *BSD was less than 1%. In practical terms, that is less than nothing.

  3. Re:w00t by Serial+Troller · · Score: -1, Troll

    It's SLOP, I tell you! Complete SLOP!! Total SLOPPY, SLOPPY SLOP!!! So much SLOP it's SLOPPING all over the frontpage!!

    --

    STOP ME BEFORE I POST AGAIN!

  4. i like freeebsd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    free bsd is very coola but di thibnk that freebsd shodul be updated more often ok? it isnt updaterd very often loike it shoudl be instead it i allow for that? i dot think so but who nows. --frank s kind of liek debina potatoe instead sine edbian potrsa isnt updaedt verry often. is it possbile ot make afork of freebasd and then updade it more of tene/; i tink it would be a good thing. but does them bsd licencec

    1. Re:i like freeebsd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
      The question that we all should be asking is ``why did *BSD fail?'' It is patently obvious that *SD is what can honestly be described as a failure. Think about that for a minute.

      So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there isthe historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

      Th record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  5. ^H^H^H^H BS^HD is ^HDEA^HD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    It was dying, then it died in january 2002! Its gravestone is sponsored by microsoft windows 2000!

    So why are you trying to bring back the dead morons?

    1. Re:^H^H^H^H BS^HD is ^HDEA^HD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
      The question that we should be asking is ``why did *SD fail?'' It is patently obvious that *BSD is what can honestly be described as a failure. Think about that for minute.

      So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible krnels, there isthe historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

      Th record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  6. What makes it interesting? by Chexum · · Score: -1, Troll
    I see there is only a schedule, no technical content whatsoever. Oh wait, FreeBSD is on the Front Page! Drool, drool!

    I'm thus enlightened.

    --
    "Ten years from now, they could do it in a few seconds." -- The Racketeer of the Hellfire Club, 1993, Phrack 42
  7. Re:Well planned release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Troll

    That's because FreeBSD is a professional project. Linux is a hobbyist's toy, and will never be considered serious for business.

  8. Re:Well planned release by Tairan · · Score: 0, Troll
    That's because Freebsd is a well designed, userfriendly structured operating system, built by professional coders. Linux is a piece of trash operating system thrown together using shitty spare parts built by code junkies who failed their comp sci classes. Not to mention bug ridden shoddy VM and tcp/ip stacks. All aside, FreeBSD makes a better system, but Linux markets better. Oh well, it won't be the first time a better OS has lost (think VMS)


    Woops, I tink I just lost a karma point.

    --
    /. is a commercial entity. goto slashdot.com
  9. Heres what you need! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
  10. Re:Thanks FreeBSD team by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    whatever fag. You think only ms haters use linux? well then i guess only linux haters use freebsd. fag. cocksucking bsd troll.

  11. Re:Thanks FreeBSD team by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    fuck you, cocksucking MS HATER. eat that shithead! EAT IT! EAT IT! buwhaahahahahahahahahah

  12. Re:Well planned release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Wow, now THAT'S what I call a troll.

  13. Re:XFree86 4.2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    ... and this is why trailer-park trash should be forcibly sterilized before the age of their first menstrual cycle.

    "Yo mama" - now THAT's saying something. It's
    the "Yo daddy" that gets most Abner's depressed. Who the hell can tell, after all?

  14. Re:5.0 is a pretty big change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    The question we should be asking is ``why did *BSD fail?'' It is patently obvious that *BSD is what can honestly be described as a failure. Think about that for a minute.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shround over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  15. Re:*BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    +1 Informative.

  16. FreeBSD dies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    I think FreeBSD sucks badly! Installation over the internet does not work at all - half of the sites where you were supposed to be able to download it were dead. It heavily looks like FreeBSD is going to die.

  17. FreeBSD is dying. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Well, FreeBSD seems to by dying. There is a major lack of support for modern devices.

  18. Linux is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    People are starting to realize that Linux
    is nothing new and just reinventing BSD,
    just not as good.

  19. Re:Well planned release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is anybody's guess whether this vaporware will see light of day. Overall, *BSD has had a dismal track record. To speak plainly, *BSD is a failure. Why don't w ponder that for a minute.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problmatic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  20. Re:XFree86 4.2.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    The questionwe should be asking is ``why did *BSD fail?'' It is patently obvious that *BSD is what can honestly be described as a failure. Think about that for a minute.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there isthe historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    Th record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  21. Re:Thanks FreeBSD team by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Netcraft has confrmed: *BSD is dying

    Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save *BSD at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    *BSD is dead

  22. *BSD and the art of failure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Yes,FreeBSD has failed. I'm sorry that there s no way to put that delicately. Truth is sometimes a harsh master. *BSD is a failure. Not a troll. Not a flame. Simple, plain facts.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shround over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  23. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

    Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For ll practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    *BSD is dying

  24. Re:*BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    The questionthat we should be asking is ``why did *BSD fail?'' It is patently obvious that *BSD is what can honestly be descrbed as a failure. Think about that for a minute.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there isthe historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    Th record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  25. B - S - D - E - A - D by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    The subject line says it all.

  26. Re:5.0 is a pretty big change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Keep this in mind: *BSD is dying.

  27. Re:Looks tempting, but what about IEEE-1394? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It really is anyone's guess whether this vaporware will see the light of day. Overall, *BSD has had a dismal track record. To speak plainly, *BSD is a failure. Why don't we ponder that for a minute.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problmatic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  28. Re:Thanks FreeBSD team by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    The real question that we should be asking is ``why did *BSD fail?'' It is patently obvious that *BSD is what can honestly be described as a failure. Think about that for a minute.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there isthe historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    Th record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  29. But i thought by LadyLucky · · Score: 0, Troll
    *BSD was dying..

    Sorry....

    --
    dominionrd.blogspot.com - Restaurants on
  30. Give it up. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    This is slashdot, no one here nows a damn thing about anything, computers especially. Slashdot is nothing but a bunch of anime watching, mp3 stealing linux dorks.

  31. FreeBSD is pretty much dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    It is really having problems. I don't think that it will survive much longer. Other than hobbyist types
    I don't think that there is much of a future in FreeBSD. It doesn't have any professional support.
    No major software vendor supports it at all. It is slowly fading away.

  32. *BSD and the art of failure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Yes, FreeBSD hs failed. I'm sorry that there is no way to put that delicately. Truth is sometimes a harsh master.
    *BSD is a failure. Not a troll. Not a flame. Simple, plain facts.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  33. Re:It's Interesting to Me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Yes, FreeBSD hs failed. I'm sorry tht there is no way to put that delicately. Truth is sometimes a harsh master.
    *BSD is a failure. Not troll. Not a flame. Simple, plain facts.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  34. Re:Thanks FreeBSD team by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    Hey, although you might not be comfortable with the thought, most people agree that Freebsd is dying. That is an honest assessment. You really can't argeue with the truth, no matter how much the truth might hurt. Truth exists independent of your personal feelings. So suck it up, put your chin up and move on. The death of Freebsd is not the end of the world. It certainly doesn't have to be the end of your world.

  35. Re:so... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It is now offcial - Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

    Yet another crippling ombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers.

    Let's keep to the facts and look t the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save hapless *BSD at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    *BSD is dying

  36. Re:5.0 is a pretty big change. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Netcraft has now confirmed: *BSD is dying

    Another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    *BSD is dead

  37. Re:Wait a minute.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    FreeBSD has no Java implementation that can be considered production quality. Compared to to Solaris, Linux, and Windows, FreeBSD Java is not in the game. I know. I tried. Believe me I tried. Java is not there on FreeBSD. If you want a Java toy, OK, FreeBSD has that. But it does not have anything fast enough or robust enough for business use. Period.

    What is worse are the flat out lies told to me by some individuals who were promoting FreeBSD to me. Not only did they discredit themselves, they discredited the very operating system they were trying to tout.

  38. Re:Well planned release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Here is the skinny on *BSD.
    • FreeBSD is dying
    • OpenBSD is dying
    • NetBSD is dying
    • *BSD is dying.
    The truth shall set you free: *BSD is dying
  39. Re:Well planned release by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Some folks need to have it spelled out for them in plain English:
    *BSD is dying. FreeBSD is dying. *BSD is dying
    That is about the size of all things *BSD.
  40. Re:w00t by Serial+Troller · · Score: -1, Troll

    Why did neither of your replies show up on my messages list? New Slashdot feature? "Don't let the trolls use the message system"?! Fucking CmdrTaco. Someone shoot him, please. Or just bomb his server. Yeah, bomb his server. Cool.

    --

    STOP ME BEFORE I POST AGAIN!

  41. *BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Netcraft confirmed: *BSD is dying

    One more crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *SD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    *BSD is dying

  42. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    "Why?" you ask? Why? I'll tell you why, because *BSD is dying.

    That should give you a clue.

  43. Re:It's Interesting to Me... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Yes, FreeSD has failed. I am very sorry there is no way to state that self evident truth more delicately.
    Truth is sometimes a harsh master. *BSD is a failure.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is frgmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of the faild operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problematic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one stp away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shround over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  44. Re:Looks tempting, but what about IEEE-1394? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    It's anybody's guess whether this vaporware will see light of day. Overall, *BSD has had dismal track record. To speak plainly, *BSD is a failure. Why don't we ponder that for a minute.

    So why now? Why did *BSD fail? Once you get past the fact that *BSD is fragmented between a myriad of incompatible kernels, there is the historical record of failure and of failed operating systems. *BSD experienced moderate success about 15 years ago in academic circles. Since then it has been in steady decline. We all know *BSD keeps losing market share but why? Is it the problmatic personalities of many of the key players? Or is it larger than their troubled personalities?

    The record is clear on one thing: no operating system has ever come back from the grave. Efforts to resuscitate *BSD are one step away from spiritualists wishing to communicate with the dead. As the situation grows more desperate for the adherents of this doomed OS, the sorrow takes hold. An unremitting gloom hangs like a death shroud over a once hopeful *BSD community. The hope is gone; a mournful nostalgia has settled in. Now is the end time for *BSD.

  45. Re:Please Ask Yourself This by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Netcraft has confirmed: *BSDis dying

    Yet another crippling bombshell hit the beleaguered *BSD community when recently IDC confirmed that *BSD accounts for less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of the latest Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as further exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

    You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood. FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers.

    Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

    OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

    Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

    All major surveys show that *SD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very, very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS hobbyist dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

    Fact: *BSD is dead

  46. Re:Nvidia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    No, none of the BSDs support binary nvidia drivers.

    They have only unaccelerated OpenGL for all video cards, and there is no DVI support.

    Further, FreeBSD cannot run on any form of LCD display, including laptops. For some reason, many of the more devoted FreeBSD users carry headless laptops however. The logic of this escapes me to this very day.