Slashdot Mirror


Nearly 2 Million Active Sites running FreeBSD

Echo|Fox writes "So much for *BSD is dying. The latest Netcraft survey shows over 2 million active sites, and almost 4 million active hostnames all running on FreeBSD. Combined with the report that 5 of the top 10 hosting companies in terms of reliability were FreeBSD based, it's been a very positive month *BSD wise. Perhaps the most interesting quote from the survey is: 'Indeed it [FreeBSD] is the only other operating system that is gaining, rather than losing share of the active sites found by the Web Server Survey.'"

112 comments

  1. Ah hell, by Eneff · · Score: 2, Funny

    And I don't have the "BSD is Dying" troll handy.

    We still have the Natalie Portman and SCO dying trolls, right?
    __

    Seriously, I don't know why BSD isn't taken more seriously as a server. Linux is insecure, whereas BSD...

    Damn, another troll.

    I give up.

    1. Re:Ah hell, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Netcraft reports, Natalie Portman is dying.

      You don't need to be a Kreskin... nevermind.

    2. Re:Ah hell, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm dying and I can't get up.

    3. Re:Ah hell, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's dead, Jim

  2. Does Mac OS X count? by Isbiten · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Does OS X count, when they sum up all the BSD machines?

    --
    I fought the corporate America, and the corporate America bought the law.
    1. Re:Does Mac OS X count? by Sevn · · Score: 1

      In this case they are actually counting FreeBSD
      machines. So no, OSX doesn't count this time. :)

      --
      For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    2. Re:Does Mac OS X count? by agent+dero · · Score: 4, Informative

      On Netcraft MacOS X shows up as MacOS X and in the server string it states "Darwin"

      So no, they are not including MacOS X :-)

      --
      Error 407 - No creative sig found
    3. Re:Does Mac OS X count? by evilviper · · Score: 1
      Does OS X count, when they sum up all the BSD machines?

      I dunno, I'm not realy good at seeing into the future personally. When they sum up all the BSD machines, I'll let you know.

      This article, on the other hand, is about FreeBSD machines only.
      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    4. Re:Does Mac OS X count? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. OS X counts as FeeBSD.

    5. Re:Does Mac OS X count? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Dear Apple,

      I am a homosexual. I bought an Apple computer because of its well earned reputation for being "the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if you could produce more software which would appeal to young boys. Thanks in advance.

      with much gayness,

      Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.

    6. Re:Does Mac OS X count? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Dear Father O'Day:

      Thanks for your letter. Being Catholic myself, I know exactly what you're talking about! It has always been our plan here at Apple Computer Inc to revolutionize personal computing with our high-quality and highly gay products.

      I'm happy to answer your letter by letting you know that YES we will be releasing an entire hLife ("homo-life") software line. You'll be able to recognize it in stores by the small stylized logo depicting a large cock entering a tight anus with an Apple logo on it. ("Suddenly it all comes together" indeed!).

      Anyway, I hope you and other members of our community will join us on our mission, and purchase the exciting new hLife boxed set. Only the boxed set comes with translucent cock rings!

      Sincerely,

      Harry Rodman
      Vice-president
      Homosexual Liaison Services
      Apple Computer, Inc.

    7. Re:Does Mac OS X count? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Elegy for *BSD


      I am a *BSD user
      and I try hard to be brave
      That is a tall order
      *BSD's foot is in the grave.

      I tap at my toy keyboard
      and whistle a happy tune
      but keeping happy's so hard,
      *BSD died so soon.

      Each day I wake and softly sob
      Nightfall finds me crying
      Not only am I a zit faced slob
      but *BSD is dying.

    8. Re:Does Mac OS X count? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No.... because Mac OS X doesn't run FreeBSD.

      That's like asking "Does Windows count, when they sum up all the C64 machines?"

  3. SSDS by linuxwrangler · · Score: 1

    Same Story Different Spin

    Maybe nobody was reading Slashdot on Sunday:
    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/07/ 13/132250 &mode=thread&tid=130&tid=185&tid=1 90

    --

    ~~~~~~~
    "You are not remembered for doing what is expected of you." - Atul Chitnis
    1. Re:SSDS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

      One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent 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 fittingly 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 plainly 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. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

      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 dilettante 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 dying

  4. NETCRAFT REPORTS by pb · · Score: 0

    * IS DYING (including BSD and NETCRAFT)

    --
    pb Reply or e-mail; don't vaguely moderate.
  5. Shocked by Ashish+Kulkarni · · Score: 0, Redundant
    I'm shocked, I tell you. Truly shocked.

    All this time I was reading here that Netcraft confirmed that *BSD was dying...and now they say it's alive, has 2 million sites and is growing.

    Maybe they should make up their minds ... ;-)

    1. Re:Shocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is official; Netcraft has now confirmed: *BSD is dying

      One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent 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 fittingly 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. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

      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 dilettante 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 dying

    2. Re:Shocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      U R SO LAME!
      GAP BAS BHADVYA! LAVDA GANDIT GHALOON PARAT JAA! MADARCHOD

      Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted!Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.

    3. Re:Shocked by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Skewed by Yahoo adding machines, and counting Yahoo mulitple times. A more interesting question is how many unique customers choose BSD.

  6. Slight error in story posting by Sevn · · Score: 4, Informative

    5 of the top 10 hosting companies in terms of reliability were FreeBSD based

    When in actuality the netcraft article says this:

    "Intriguingly, all of the Top 5 placed sites run the FreeBSD operating system" :)

    Slight difference there.

    --
    For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
    1. Re:Slight error in story posting by kace · · Score: 1

      When in actuality the netcraft article says this: "Intriguingly, all of the Top 5 placed sites run the FreeBSD operating system" :)

      Indeed! One might wonder if a troll submitted this story pre-emptively, with a bad summary, as part of a damage control effort.

      I like penguins. I just don't want them screwing up my machines. :p

    2. Re:Slight error in story posting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are some kind of paranoid weirdo.

  7. Might as well get this out of the way now... by Sevn · · Score: 4, Funny

    This doesn't show anything! I'm a big fanboy for:

    _____ -- put OS here

    That runs:

    _____ -- put web server here

    And it's just as reliable and good as FreeBSD.
    Hell, It's BETTER because:

    ___________________________-- put dubious statistics here

    _______ -- put marketing rhetoric here

    And besides, you can't do:

    ________ -- put proprietary technology here

    with FreeBSD anyway so it's worthless!!!

    --
    For every annoying gentoo user, are three even more annoying anti-gentoo crybabies. Take Yosh from #Gimp for example.
  8. News at 11... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...nearly 2 million active sites are dying :)

    1. Re:News at 11... by rylin · · Score: 0

      Make that 2 million + 1
      /.ers! Advance!

  9. I wonder ... by Rip!ey · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much the FUD from SCO might have contributed to this ...

    1. Re:I wonder ... by fyonn · · Score: 1

      virtually none I imagine. huge hosting centres don't decide to change their hosting OS as a lightly made decision and it's not something they can or would do quickly. if they're using it now, then they were using it last year in all likelyhood.

      not that linux is a bad OS by any means, but perhaps all these sites are using freebsd, cos they like it and thinks it performs well, rather than just using it as a refuge from legal action?

      dave

  10. miscellania (sp?) by ph43thon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I found this article hopeful.. at first. It seems to suggest that the only reason BSD sites are increasing is because of mainly Yahoo and a few other hosting sites who use BSD. Either way, if Yahoo uses it.. people who work at Yahoo must learn to administer it. So that's good.. I guess.

    Now, as for the professional "anon cows" who seem to dedicate their creativity to explaining the end of BSD, these arguments are disingenious. Mainly, the only thing that may or may not be dying is the current power structure behind the three named distributions (open, free, net). The centralized structure may eventually die.. and then BSD will just adopt the decentralized model ala Linux.

    saying FreeBSD is dying would be like saying "Latin is dying" back when it started branching into its current variants. By making such statements.. one just shows how little they grasp what BSD is. Maybe people don't speak Latin today... but they certainly speak Spanish or Italian. In the future, people may not have a Main Office to hold their "I heart BSD" rallies.. but they will be using it.

    1. Re:miscellania (sp?) by Arandir · · Score: 0

      It seems to suggest that the only reason BSD sites are increasing is because of mainly Yahoo and a few other hosting sites who use BSD.

      Since when is Yahoo a hosting site? The reason FreeBSD sites are increasing is because webhosters love FreeBSD.

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    2. Re:miscellania (sp?) by ph43thon · · Score: 1

      http://webhosting.yahoo.com/

    3. Re:miscellania (sp?) by Arandir · · Score: 1

      Eeeeh! You need a Yahoo!ID...

      --
      A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
    4. Re:miscellania (sp?) by ph43thon · · Score: 1

      ha.. nah, you just freaked out when you saw the login.. it's just their very sparse webhosting site.. the login is for existing users.

    5. Re:miscellania (sp?) by usotsuki · · Score: 1

      Er...Yahoo owns Geocities...

      -uso.

      --
      Dreams, dreams, don't doubt dreams, dreaming children's dreaming dreams. Sailor Moon SS
    6. Re:miscellania (sp?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I guess we can agree on one thing, i.e. that overall *BSD is indeed a failure. But 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.

    7. Re:miscellania (sp?) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BSD is dying. End of story.

  11. FreeBSD is very alive!!! by horcy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm running FreeBSD 4.8-RELEASE as a server/router solution. I've talked with linux users about al the amazing features it has and the stability it offers. All of have switched to FreeBSD. If you want to install something, you just look up your port in the ports list, you type: make install distclean, and you are ready. It automatically downloads it from a ftp server, if the first is down, it checks for a mirror site. It checks for all necessary dependencies and installs that too. I started with Mandrake linux and after that i'm in FreeBSD land. Never looked back since. Oh did i mention it has the Unreal Tournament and Quake3 server in the ports? One "make install" away for pure gaming haven for you and all your friends =P

    --
    Check my site: http://pixel.pagina.nl
    1. Re:FreeBSD is very alive!!! by josepha48 · · Score: 1
      For a server / gateway / router, I'd agree. FreeBSD is really good. I have my home gateway / router setup as a FreeBSD system. I think configuring it is actually easier than Linux configuring. Almost everything is done in the /etc/rc.conf file on FreeBSD, except my firewall script.

      I use NetBSD on my laptop though cause it has better hardware support than FreeBSD for some reason? FreeBSD used to hang on my laptop nic and sound didn't work, so I use NetBSD there.

      However for applications / my desktop I prefer Linux. Yes I know BSD's have LInux emulation and I have tried it and it works okay, but why emulate when you can just as easily run the real thing?

      They are all good, each in their own way!

      --

      Only 'flamers' flame!
      Does slashdot hate my posts?

    2. Re:FreeBSD is very alive!!! by bugg · · Score: 2, Informative

      It is very unfair, in my opinion, to refer to the process of system call translation (the driving force behind FreeBSD's linuxulator, which enables, for those of you who don't know, software *compiled for Linux* to run on FreeBSD- of note only for the Linux software that does not have source available) as emulation. It is binary compatibility of the highest order. Simply put, it does little more than translate syscall numbers on the fly, also adjusting for things like differences in arguments. Quickly sizing up the FreeBSD system source tree right now, the code for linux compatiblity comes in at under 256KB. The overhead per system call of the linuxulator is not measured in fractions of a second but rather in instructions. Add to that the possiblity that FreeBSD may be doing the system call itself faster, or be more responsive for other reasons, and you quickly see that there's no reason to assume the footing is unequal because the binaries were compiled for Linux.

      --
      -bugg
  12. Re:*BSD is dying by kace · · Score: 2, Funny

    It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying ... Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers. ... All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share.

    I think I get it now. These trolls -- they're all government accountants!

    "It depends what the meaning of the word 'more' is."

  13. Troll and Offtopic don't seem quite right.... by ctucker · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What we really need is more downmod options, like "Stupid fool", "Moron", "Cum-gargling gutterslut" or "Too inbred to think". Clearly these would be more specific to the type of BSD troll who links to early-90s filesystem research papers and claims that it has any relevance today.

    --

    --
    My other computer is your IIS server.
    1. Re:Troll and Offtopic don't seem quite right.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm missing a "Deamon" option!

    2. Re:Troll and Offtopic don't seem quite right.... by xombo · · Score: 1

      Ahem, it's cum guzzling gutter slut. Get your terms straight man!

  14. What the summary doesn't tell you by ArmorFiend · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Indeed it [FreeBSD] is the only other operating system that is gaining, rather than losing share

    Only other than what? It turns out, if you follow links, that Win2k3 server is the other gaining OS. They go on to say this:

    Comparing the sites which are now hosted on Windows 2003 with their operating system in December 2002 shows over 42% of these to be new sites, 43% (68K) to be upgrades from other Windows platforms (mainly Windows 2000), 5% (8K) to be migrations from Linux and 1% from other operating systems.

    Microsoft will take some considerable encouragement at the number of sites that have switched from Linux.


    Woo, 1/20th of their new sales come from previously linux sites.
    *Makes hand-wank gesture*
    1. Re:What the summary doesn't tell you by ratfynk · · Score: 2, Interesting
      It just means that the number of windows software pirates has increased in proportion to the number of useless lame web sites. I have no dought Win2003 is the spammers Os of choice. If one looks to the Orient software pirates prefer Windows server software because of ease of use, and the fact that it is easy to pirate. I believe I have read somewhere that the pirate trick is now by using a false verification web activation, and the law authorities are having real trouble keeping track of the pirates.

      Gates might be having kittens but the 2003 licence sales are not reflected in the number that are poping up, like a weed on the outlaw net. This kind of software piracy is a direct result of MS pricing policies.

      Microsoft may be trying to encourage poor countries to use their software by giving it away , to influence local authorities to crack down. They tried the other root (American strongarm political influence) and failed. So they tried the stick now they are trying candy.

      --
      OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
    2. Re:What the summary doesn't tell you by Quill_28 · · Score: 1

      Whats really important here is did the total Windows server increase or decrease. I would expect 2003 to increase because it is so new and well known. Well, NT 4 server to decrease until it is no more, and 2000? not sure.

    3. Re:What the summary doesn't tell you by mattyohe · · Score: 1

      look at netcrafts page today :)

      netcraft

      Windows Server 2003 approaching 100,000 active sites; 8,000 sites switch from Linux

      --
      - what is the definition of simultanagnosia?! I've been meaning to look it up!
    4. Re:What the summary doesn't tell you by ArmorFiend · · Score: 1

      That is quite odd. Once you've gone to the trouble to set up a linux site, why tear it down and install a propriatary time-bomb ... er ... excuse me ... "solution".

    5. Re:What the summary doesn't tell you by MeNeXT · · Score: 1
      What is your point. Are you comapring versions of OS's or OS's? Win2k3 is the same as Win2K and WinNT.

      --
      DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
    6. Re:What the summary doesn't tell you by ArmorFiend · · Score: 1

      What is your point.

      Is this a question? If it is a question, then my point is: Its so bleedingly obvious (to THEM) that Dohs2k3 is gaining market share that they don't even have to say that it is! I'm suprised that its that much of a foregone conclusion.

      Are you comapring versions of OS's or OS's? Win2k3 is the same as Win2K and WinNT.

      True enough, they're doing apples-to-oranges.

    7. Re:What the summary doesn't tell you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can draw many "contradictory" insights from the stats. If you are really interested in BSD market penetration, the Netcraft stats paint a different picture. Almost all the FreeBSD gains are attributable to Yahoo expansion. These are the machine counts which Netcraft refers to. But market penetration is far less. True market share in the sense of unique customers is way down for all the BSDs.

  15. I'll see you and undercut you a word by leonbrooks · · Score: 0
    urpmi nameofpackage

    ...or in debian...

    apt-get install nameofpackage

    ...or in MS-Windows...

    Aaaah! Where do I click? How do I pay for this? I want my paperclip!

    --
    Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
    1. Re:I'll see you and undercut you a word by Groganz · · Score: 1
      apt-get install nameofpackage
      Does that allow to customise the package with make options?
    2. Re:I'll see you and undercut you a word by leonbrooks · · Score: 1

      Yes. Debian's installs often provide run-time configuration based on a few simple questions as well (with reasonable defaults).

      URPMI also installs from source, more opaque than Debian installs but often with more useful collections of patches and/or options preloaded, and you can always do the rebuild process by hand to suggest things to configure.

      More typing, of course, but TANSTAAFL.

      I suppose you could always try Debian FreeBSD and see how you get along.

      --
      Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
    3. Re:I'll see you and undercut you a word by andrewski · · Score: 0

      I suppose you could always try Debian FreeBSD and see how you get along.

      Bleargh! slosh * Excuse me.

      That was the sound of my guts hitting the floor. The only time I have ever puked harder than that was when somebody suggested the Hurd for getting actual work done.

      I don't think that either the Debian or Red Hat solutions offer anywhere near the ease of use or level of control that Ports offers.

    4. Re:I'll see you and undercut you a word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i am teh gay boi, you are too, kiss kiss kiss.

  16. Re:So Much For *BSD Is Living by nutznboltz · · Score: 2, Informative
    AT&T filed suit against Berkeley Software, claiming that proprietary code agreements had been haphazardly violated. In the same year, BSD filed countersuit, reciprocating bad intentions and fueling internal rivalry
    Oh and Linux has no problems with lawsuits.
    Theo de Raadt
    You've got RMS, don't talk about Theo.
    BSD's filesystem implementation to be "very poorly performing."
    Obsolete refernce, doesn't mention softupdates.
    rapid, decentralized development models are inherently superior to slow, centralized ones in software development.
    The Linux kernel development has to push everything through Linus so you've got bottlenecks too.
    corporations and coders alike to reap profits without reciprocating the goodwill of open-source
    You've got LindowsOS so don't talk about corporate greed.
    The failure of BSD culminated in the resignation of Jordan Hubbard and Michael Smith from the FreeBSD core team.
    So all the current success is not happening, huh?

    Is it just me or does the *BSD is Dying troll seem like he has real problems
  17. DNS servers on FreeBSD are great too by nutznboltz · · Score: 1

    It's easy to disassociate the nameserver from the OS using the ports tree so it's easy to upgrade the system and more secure since you can run in a change-root.

    See this USENET post.

    1. Re:DNS servers on FreeBSD are great too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And your point is? I assume you have a point to make but I don't see it.

  18. Enterprise BSD? by iggymanz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm involved in an Oracle on Solaris/sparc to Linux/Intel migration, and I can't but thinking why not also FreeBSD for the enterprise? It has the fibre HBA drivers for SAN, it has a volume manager, it has a very stable filesystem (moreso than ext2/3), it can run Oracle with Linux emulation libraries, has SMP, a fantastic TCP/IP stack, easy installation/upgrading of ports & packages.

    I never used FreeBSD until a few months ago when I tried to get my favorite, OpenBSD, up on a very weird 1U Intel based server I picked up on eBay from a failed telco. Versions 2.9 to 3.3 of OBSD wouldn't work, it would hang in the idle loop FreeBSD 5.x has been running fine on it (don't know why)

    1. Re:Enterprise BSD? by agent+dero · · Score: 1

      You seem to miss the beauty of the ports collection.

      Using the ports I can adapt my server to be my desktop computer, and vice versa with my desktop PC.

      If you look into other "enterprise" OSS solutions, you'll find out they are not HUGELY different from the normal solutions. For instance redhat enterprise software is mostly different from the normal redhat OS because it has a longer shelf-life, meaning you do not need to upgrade every 6 months.

      --
      Error 407 - No creative sig found
    2. Re:Enterprise BSD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As to getting OpenBSD running on old hardware, I have had nothing but outstanding success. Everything just boots, and if a Dell P90 is so old that the CD won't boot, a floppy install does the trick. In fact I have had so much success that it is no longer a challenge. Sorry to hear about your 1U telco orphan. On the other hand, the one time I tried and gave up installing FreeBSD doesn't make it a bad OS either. To each their area of success.

    3. Re:Enterprise BSD? by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      OpenBSD is still my favorite; though it would have a somewhat longer list of needed items to be made into an "enterprise" server (if the project ever even went in that direction). I was just telling how I came to be interested & fascinated in FreeBSD recently.

    4. Re:Enterprise BSD? by MattBurke · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Try taking a sniff around the servers of larger, more clueful ISPs - They almost all use FreeBSD. Why? Because that's the place FreeBSD grew up. Linux has the hobyist hackers working on it whereas a high proportion of FreeBSD users/developers work in the ISP biz. It's just evolved into the perfect serious server OS.

      I've seen FreeBSD boxes (mail servers to be precise) with load averages approaching 1000. They were sluggish, but perfectly usable both over ssh and smtp. That was during a rather nasty spam attack - yet the boxes kept on working. You couldn't say that for a Linux box in that situation. Sorry, but it would be stone cold dead by then.

      Sure, we don't have all the twinkly bits that Linux users enjoy, but we go get one mother of a workhorse :D

    5. Re:Enterprise BSD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Each day on the way to work I pass a huge Oracle office building. The Oracle sign on the top of the building is in huge 12 foot high letters. Next to this building is Oracle's huge parking garage. I guess the operative word for all of this is "huge".

      Think about it this way. If all of the admittedly few BSD vendors sold all of their assets, they could not afford to build even the basement of this one Oracle parking garage. And this is only one Oracle campus, in one city.

      Talking about Oracle on BSD is talking about the tale wagging the dog. BSD is extremely small potatoes. Oracle is big--nay, huge--business.

    6. Re:Enterprise BSD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fags like *BSD a lot.

    7. Re:Enterprise BSD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do any of the BSD's support shared SCSI storage?

    8. Re:Enterprise BSD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whatever.

    9. Re:Enterprise BSD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a one. Sorry.

    10. Re:Enterprise BSD? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      BSD is dying, and yes, that includes OpenBSD too.

  19. OS/2 IS DYING! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    What more proof do you need?!

    1. Re:OS/2 IS DYING! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Here is a special clue, especially for you,
      *BSD is dying
      Hope this helps.
  20. Hate to say it, but... by cyberb0b · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    *BSD is dead. Long live *BSD.

  21. Re:*BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Read your own troll, idiot.

  22. Production by rf0 · · Score: 1

    I've found FreeBsd to be a nice stable platform which I run my business on. No dowtime due to kernels oops. It just gets up and runs and runs and runs...

    Yeah ok this is a pimp but FreeBSD just works and the package management is only second to debian (which I think is being ported)

    Rus

    1. Re:Production by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What is the name of your business? How many employees? What is the size of the payroll?

      This information would allow us to put your claims in some sort of realistic context. Thanks.

    2. Re:Production by acidtripp101 · · Score: 1

      package management only second to debian?! I'm sorry, but the fBSD package management system is by far better than debian. (this may seem like a troll... but it's not, I swear) Debian packages tend to be outdated. And, while this doesn't really matter on a server (unless you're upgrading to fix an exploit, I guess), it means that I can't stand using it on a desktop (yes... I use freeBSD as a desktop at home). On freebsd, if I want to upgrade my ports tree, no problem. cvsup it and I've got updated packages. apt-get update just hasn't been able to keep up with package releases (well, not enough to suit me, I guess). To conclude: Debian rocks, but I like freeBSD more.

      --
      Not Free(as in beer). Free(as in "I'm free to beat you over the head for being a dumbass")
    3. Re:Production by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Whatever the differences a few of us might possess, we surely can strive find some common ground. No doubt all of us can easily acknowledge the plain truth that in the balance *BSD would have to be considered a failure. So why did *BSD fail? What is at the root of *BSD's colossal miscue?

      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.

  23. BSD reports by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    Netcraft is dying!

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  24. Re:ports suck by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

    > I gotta chime in here. It really pisses me off
    > that FreeBSD does not let you (by default) [make update]

    Just a thought, but did you even *consider* installing "portupgrade"? It just happens to be a little program to automatically upgrade ports. My apologies if you were just trolling.

  25. Re:ports suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "portupgrade"? Never heard of it. I'll check it out. Thanks.

  26. Re:Hang on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    keesh: I thought BSD was dying...

    You thought right.

  27. Barbara Streisand Dummies - BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    July 18, 2003 -- Barbra Streisand has not forgiven Joe Lieberman for his pointed comments about how Hollywood debases American values. Bush-hating Babs gave bucks to every other major Democratic presidential contender - Howard Dean, John Kerry, Bob Graham, John Edwards, Dick Gephardt and even Al Sharpton - but conspicuously left Lieberman off her list. Could it be Iraq? Well Gephardt, Edwards and Kerry all voted for the Iraq war, as Lieberman did.

    Lieberman spokesman Jano Cabrera tells The Post's Deborah Orin: "As someone once said, people need people. And we look forward to returning to the way we were in the future and earning the support of our funny valentine in the general election." Not that Babs was overly generous for a multimillionaire - the maximum donation now is $2,000 but she gave $1,000 apiece. Also missing from her gift list was the only woman in the race, ex-Sen. Carol Moseley Braun, and the very most liberal contender, Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio.)

  28. Almost.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fags like us like the Anonymous Coward account more than anything!

  29. Re:Hang on by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
    Here's the situation as it stands:
    • Uday is dead.
    • Qusay is dead
    • BSD is dead
    There you have it folks. All dead.
  30. Since when is...? by phorm · · Score: 1

    "SCO is dying" a troll? Hell, they're being a bit loud about it, but they are definately starting to go through the death throes.

    In a year or two from now... I'd expect "BSD is dying" might be replaced with "SCO is dying"... and then it'll only be funny 'cause SCO will be long past dead by then (as Slashdot newbies say "SCO-who?")

    1. Re:Since when is...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I found the meaning of SCO

      S tolen
      C ode
      O nly

      If SCO kills Linux, they will steal code from BSD next!

    2. Re:Since when is...? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I have it on very good authority that *BSD is dying.

      This would include FreeBSD too, ergo FreeBSD is dying.

  31. Hard times for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    We certainly can agree on one thing, that overall *BSD is indeed a failure. But 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.

  32. Elegy for *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Elegy For *BSD


    I am a *BSD user
    and I try hard to be brave
    That is a tall order,
    *BSD's foot is in the grave.

    I tap at my toy keyboard
    and whistle a happy tune
    but keeping happy's so hard,
    *BSD died so soon.

    Each day I wake and softly sob
    Nightfall finds me crying
    Not only am I a zit faced slob
    but *BSD is dying.

  33. Re:*BSD is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    So why now? Why is it that *BSD failed? 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. this bitch be dead by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sho nuff

  35. 2 Million Sites = How Many Servers? by CryBaby · · Score: 1

    OK, I already know I'm stupid, so please don't feel compelled to point that out, BUT... Aren't these statistics based on IP addresses? If so, does anyone know how many actual boxes comprise the 2 mil sites?

  36. BSD will be dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait till SCO finds out about BSD.

    All Unixlike code are belong to SCO......
    Just because they don't own it, does not mean they cannot try to bill you for it, this is America!
    I am sure SCO has stolen some code from BSD too.

  37. Top 10 Quotes about *BSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    10. "Death is not the end. There remains the litigation over the IP." -- Ambrose Bierce

    9. "The report of BSD's death was an exaggeration." -- Mark Twain

    8. "My grandmother was a very tough woman. She buried three husbands and two of them were just napping." -- Rita Rudner

    7. "Ours is not to wonder why, ours is just to compile or die"

    6. "There are worse things in life than death. Have you ever spent an evening with an SCO attorney? -- Woody Allen

    5. "They say such nice things about OS's at their funerals that it makes me sad that I'm going to miss mine by just a few days." -- Garrison Kiellor

    4. "Either BSD's dead or my watch has stopped." -- Groucho Marx

    3. "*BSD rode in on a pale horse"

    2. "I did not come to bury BSD, but to praise it"

    1. "Please don't bury me. I'm not compiled yet"