Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD: Not Exactly Dead
quantumice writes "It would seem that despite being dead and there only being six of us who use it, FreeBSD has clocked up nearly 2.5 million active sites according to Netcraft. So by my estimates that must mean that I and each of my 5 friends run 416 667 sites. That might explain my high bandwidth usage."
Start your trolling
This story is posted because BSD doesn't generate a lot of exciting news. Well, that's not true: there's lots of exciting news for people who care about BSD. But none of the editors care much about BSD. They like Linux and MacOS X, and talking trash about MS and SCO. This means that they have trouble identifying the stories that actual, honest-to-God BSD users find interesting. But they still feel they ought to give us something, since after all BSD has an entire section on Slashdot. And I guess they are trying to encourage Open Source Brotherhood, not realizing that most BSD users would prefer not to be associated with most Linux users.
pair have been using it all along. They've got well over 100,000 domains running. They're but one company.
Oh yeah - Apple's another...
does this mean that domain hijackers/squatters use openbsd? They sure could use the security anyways..
what a pointless story!
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
is to be able to moderate an entire story as a troll.
all you are, is all you are, i'm so sorry for you.
Interestingly enough, stories that would seem to be obvious troll fodder don't seem to attract all that much troll interest.
Go figure.
1 machine that runs Mac OSX (a Powerbook)
1 machine that runs Windows 2000 (games machine)
1 machine that runs FreeBSD (workhorse server)
1 machine that runs BeOS 5 (old machine, not seriously used)
I consider all of the above to be "best of breed" operating systems. Linux absolutely blows because of the fragmented userbase. I have a hard time caring about it because of the thousand different distributions all doing things differently.
FreeBSD beats the crap out of Linux for:
* Ease of use - extremely well documented, everything is logically organised
* Reliability - they.. shock.. *test* before they release! (unlike Fedora's GRUB which nuked my drive when I tried it)
* Compatibility - the ports tree is fantastic, plus it runs Linux executables
In short: FreeBSD is great. If you've ever become frustrated with Linux, give it a try. I guarantee you'll love it!
- Rule of BSD Club: Don't talk about BSD
- Rule of BSD Club: Don't talk about BSD
- if this is your first night with BSD, you have to code
The rules of Linux Club:Bah... The reason BSD Club has those rules is because the members are dying, so they are unable to talk anymore and the new recruits are the only ones that aren't suffering from horrible diseases that prevent them from coding. The new recruits have to pick up the slack.
Since when has the BSD crowd enjoyed posting flamebait? Hehe. Aren't you breaking your rules?
Oh, and Linux is SO COOL! SCO SUCKS. Microsft.. *checks his notes* sucks! Is that still the stance, or are we hating someone else now?
All in jest though. I want to have some BSD installs, but I am quite lacking in hardware. Perhaps one of the dying folks would leave me a spare box in their will?
That's scary.
FreeBSD and BSD/OS are beating any OS. Just visit Sites with longest running systems by average uptime.
It's a complete OS.
It's not a clone.
Everything runs faster.
It doesn't mess up with your MBR.
It does not come with a particular browser pre-installed.
It's always fun to run FreeBSD.
And I guess they are trying to encourage Open Source Brotherhood, not realizing that most BSD users would prefer not to be associated with most Linux users.
Really? that's why every linux convention thing I've been too, has had a BSD booth. Or almost all conversations with BSD users seem to involve Linux in some way. Please. A win for BSD is a win for Linux and vice versa. Soon as linux takes over the desktop BSD will win converts.
Quoting the article; The reason for this is FreeBSD's deployment with the operators of shared hosting systems, where tens and even hundreds of thousands of sites are collectively administered as part of a single system.
Yahoo alone hosts something like a quarter million sites.
Perhaps this also explains the low media-profile to some degree ? 10000 companies running 25 sites each are likely to collectively generate a lot more buzz than a single site running a quarter million sites.
I call karma whore
I can't find the original source though... pity...
groklaw, wired and slashdot. The holy trinity of work based time wasting.
Not all OSes can have those uptimes. BTW, what you're saying about the uptime thing I guess it was resolved in the Linux kernel 2.6.x series.
From user 5 of 6.
Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
This is all rather dependant on the accuracy of Netcraft. Although most of the FreeBSD systems I maintain are identified correctly by Netcraft, there are several that always come back as unknown. Netcraft OS detections seems to be reasonable, but not perfect. Their webserver detection is as accurate as it can be, but uptime checks seem to be even less perfect.
Nothing but the finest in meaningless drivel
Personally, for a server I love a boring OS. Thats why I use FreeBSD on all my servers at home (Solaris at work, bleh!) For the desktop where I want eye-candy OS X all the way. Once I get in the terminal it is so much like FreeBSD I can really get things done.
I just got an ipod and it is the sweetest gadget I have ever owned and the way and the integration with my ibook is amazing. If you haven't tried it and you like music do what ever it takes to get an apple laptop and and an ipod. I was waiting for the color screen but I decided to get started with a 15gig and give it to my wife when I get a color one. I am having a lot of fun with it and if I had known I would have bought one sooner. I can't wait to get my hands on one of those airport express dealies.
A BSD troll is like a retarded kid with a xylophone.
From their FAQ:
;)
Additionally HP-UX, Linux, NetApp NetCache, Solaris and recent releases of FreeBSD cycle back to zero after 497 days, exactly as if the machine had been rebooted at that precise point. Thus it is not possible to see a HP-UX, Linux or Solaris system with an uptime measurement above 497 days.
The *BSDs is very neat, and will probably be my OS of choice on my next computer (selling my mac and either getting a laptop or desktop PC), but lets not get carried away
-Tezkah, user 7 of 7!?
It's a joke. Lighten up. Sheesh...
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Yes, I don't know if you're serious, but Gentoo Linux is a build-from-source Linux distro that has a ports system called 'portage'
I myself use Gentoo because I prefer Linux over the *BSDs I've tried, but Gentoo lets me build from source VERY easily.
"Sometimes, I think Trent just needs a cup of hot chocolate and a blankie." -Tori Amos on Nine Inch Nails
Guess what? I use FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Linux, and OSX. Not on the same machine, of course. Each useful for something, and really, that's what software is for. Engineers choose the best tool for the job. Only idiots choose a tool based on how cool they think it is, and I find frequently that those who brag most about what OS they use do so not because they have a good reason for using it, but in fact because they don't. Bragging results from their idological reasons for using their chosen software; had they real reasons, they would understand that others have real reasons for using other software.
Point: I use Mac OSX on my laptop. Why? Because it has desktop software I want to use and it functions smoothly and reliably. When time means something, graphical one-click installers are kinda nice, and because the hardware--Powerbooks are sweet--isn't as well supported in other OSes. I use Linux on my desktop. Why? Because I like the software available, I know my way around it, and I find myself more productive in it. I also code for Linux, so it's important I have a machine that runs what I write. I run FreeBSD on my server. Why? Because it runs faster and more reliably on the old hardware I have, and generally requires fewer software patches than Linux. I used to run OpenBSD on that machine, in fact, but found the performance hit wasn't worth it. However, I chose OpenBSD for embedded access-point use, because of the few patches needed--upgrading software on a 25MB diskonmodule is a bitch--and the excellent VPN impelementation.
So you can see, there are reasons for using each OS in it's own environment. Tell me differently.