Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

FreeBSD: Not Exactly Dead

Posted by timothy on from the the-kind-of-death-we-long-for dept.

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."

24 of 184 comments (clear)

  1. Gentlemen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Start your trolling

    1. Re:Gentlemen by kwench · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'd love to... but I still don't understand why everybody is raving about *BSD being dead.

      After having learned that Windows XP is a VMS clone and that Linux is a Minix clone which is a UNIX clone which is a MULTICS clone which is a CTSS clone which is a FMS clone which I have never heard about and which is probably dead, dead, dead I'd think that everything - even BeOS and QNX (and this FreeBSD clone MacOS X) are UNIX-influenced (if not based) and therefore dead, dead, dead. 8-)
      I used to prefer FreeBSD over GNU/Linux because of the straightforward install without bells and whistles and the easy way to compile parts of the system. The only disappointing thing is the lack of drivers for my exotic hardware, at least I was so far not able to find working drivers for my external CD-writer, my laptop's USB and a single of my three USB webcams.

      Well... then I discovered Gentoo and everything was fine again... 8-)

  2. Re:The purpose of this story? by ctr2sprt · · Score: 4, Insightful

    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.

  3. pair Networks by rixstep · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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...

  4. What we need by krist0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    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.
  5. I have.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    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!

    1. Re:I have.. by n0dez · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which packages did you try to install?

      Why should I be using a Unix-clone (aka Linux distribution) when there's FreeBSD?

      Wrong! Not all apps are being developed for a Linux distro. In fact, Firefox is being developed in Windows and later is ported to other OSes. Apache is being developed in FreeBSD. Most Linux distributions (if not all) are using many stuff from FreeBSD and saying it's a Linux app and not saying where it comes from. Nasty, uh? GNU doesn't have everything so they have to take some userland tools from other OSes (*BSD mostly).

      One problem with one Linux distribution? Wrong, gnorw, wrong! The latest version of the Linux kernel has a very annoying bug... it doesn't detect correctly your hd's geometry and messes it up so you can't boot up Windows. So using ANY Linux distro with that kernel will give you problems. Maybe RMS introduced it as he wants everything to be GPL... a monopoly in the open source world! So, like Nas says in his "You can" song, read more learn!

      Well, there are FreeBSD developers working on FreeBSD and getting paid for that. John Hubbard, Poul-Henning Kamp, etc.

      Linux: more unstable drivers, some stable drivers taken from FreeBSD, fragmented distributions, what it works on Linux distro A might not work on Linux distro B (even using the same package management like RPM!), full of politics, etc.

      Virtually none of the FOSS apps are primarily targed on *BSD? Uhmm... once again, read more learn. It seems you don't give a damn about *BSD. It's OK, but please don't talk about something you don't know you. Thanks to BSD Unix and its friendly licence the TCP/IP (and the Internet) was born. Many commands you use on your lovely Linux distro have been taken from FreeBSD, vi was born BSD Unix, Apache was born on FreeBSD, XFree86 was born on FreeBSD, etc. Go get a O'Reilly book about Linux and you'll read... what's a Linux distribution? Linux distribution = Linux kernel + GNU tools + BSD tools.
      Repeat with me... read more learn, you don't have to be gangstas, ...

    2. Re:I have.. by Nighttime · · Score: 4, Informative

      One problem with one Linux distribution? Wrong, gnorw, wrong! The latest version of the Linux kernel has a very annoying bug... it doesn't detect correctly your hd's geometry and messes it up so you can't boot up Windows. So using ANY Linux distro with that kernel will give you problems. Maybe RMS introduced it as he wants everything to be GPL... a monopoly in the open source world! So, like Nas says in his "You can" song, read more learn!

      Actually, it's the Windows installer that writes the incorrect partition table. When the Linux installer comes along it writes out a correct partition table that then prevents Windows from booting. But don't let the facts get in the way of a rant. :)

      --
      I've got a fever and the only prescription is more COBOL.
    3. Re:I have.. by kjd · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Ease of use" (also "user-friendliness") should not be confused with "short learning curve" or "newbie-friendliness". FreeBSD is extremely easy for me to use, as an experienced user, and that is currently FreeBSD's largest target audience. Moreso for OpenBSD, which gets many "too hard to install" and similar complaints. It is easy to install when you know what you're doing. Making it more intuitive to newcomers to Unix-like OSes is not a priority for them, because it is written for and by hackers/professionals, and a very large userbase would overwhelm the small development team anyhow.

      Your other two points do seem to be true. Linux in my experience has in general been reliable for a long time, and a wider variety of hardware (especially niche hardware like particular laptop support, etc). It should be noted that although FreeBSD's security team only publically commits to a year's worth of updates, older versions than this are normally updated when they are affected. It is also relatively simple to upgrade FreeBSD. This definitely does not compare with the commitment of support for other commercial Unix OSes (Solaris, AIX, etc) however.

  6. Re:The purpose of this story? by HolyCoitus · · Score: 3, Funny

    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.
  7. Uptimes by n0dez · · Score: 4, Informative

    FreeBSD and BSD/OS are beating any OS. Just visit Sites with longest running systems by average uptime.

    1. Re:Uptimes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sigh. Linux, Solaris and some other UNIX variants wrap their uptime counters at 497 days -- so they CAN'T be on that list.

      It's not remotely an indication of FreeBSD's quality.

    2. Re:Uptimes by kayumi · · Score: 4, Funny

      That's nothing compared to the downtimes. I have a 200Mhz notebook running FreeBSD 3.5 which I haven't switched on once these last two years. (Most likely because I dropped it and the screen stopped working).

  8. FreeBSD in a nutshell by n0dez · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

    1. Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell by DashEvil · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Linux 2.6 does not obliterate FreeBSD.

      The last benchmarks I saw (Linux 2.6 vrs. FreeBSD 5.x) proved them to be simular performance wise.

      Stop mischaracterizing the parent posters argument. Their argument was that Linux isn't a complete OS, not that Mandrake or Slackware isn't.

      Personally, I'm pro FreeBSD, for reasons that are my own. You can cry and whine about it all you want, but if you are to critize my OS choice at least use facts.

      --
      -If God wanted people to be better than me, he would have made them that way.
    2. Re:FreeBSD in a nutshell by xoboots · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Stop mischaracterizing the parent posters argument. Their argument was that Linux isn't a complete OS, not that Mandrake or Slackware isn't.

      Does it occur to you that that is a frivolous point? So FreeBSD is a big monolith whereas we can create any custom OS using the Linux kernel + various tools (which turns out to be a blessing for embedded and limited systems). I think the original poster was trying to slag "Linux" because it was "just a kernel" whereas FreeBSD is a "full-blown OS". But that's putting one's head in one's ass because nearly anyone using the Linux kernel will be doing so from a fully packaged OS like Debian or Slackware, etc. Saying otherwise is the subterfuge.

      And don't tell me that the "Linux" factions are more fragmented because of the amazing variety of choices available. Most things are standardized or on their way. Besides, is it not true that FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD et al represent factions on the BSD side? I do agree that BSD is mostly better in those regards, though.

      Please don't get me wrong: FreeBSD is a very fine OS. I just don't see why *BSDers feel the need to talk about that "other OS" whenever they bring up their own. Is your OS not worthy of being talked about in its own right? I suggest it is and it would be nice to see discussions that actually followed that ideal for a change. Mainly because in today's world, the old adage that "*BSD is so much better than */Linux" proves to be either false, misleading, or tragically unimportant in significant ways.

      To be honest, I haven't run a *BSD OS in a long while. Mainly because I'm not fond of the license, but that's my own personal preference at play. (And BTW, no matter how good *BSD may ever be or become, some will never, ever use it for this reason alone. Same can be said of */Linux.)

      Cheers!

  9. Re:The purpose of this story? by gangien · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  10. very funny. by Eivind · · Score: 4, Insightful
    But, as a matter of fact, if you read the netcraft report you yourself are linking to, then you see that indeed, FreeBSD is significant in webservers largely because a few large hosting-providers use it.

    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.

    1. Re:very funny. by aztektum · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What exactly are you trying to say here?

      That BSD is still dead because it's a small number of individual establishments using it, despite the large amount of systems they run it on?

      2.5 million servers is still a big number, regardless of how spread out it is. Just b/c people say it's dead doesn't mean 2.5 million servers will be changed to Linux tomorrow.

      --
      :: aztek ::
      No sig for you!!
    2. Re:very funny. by Brandybuck · · Score: 3, Funny

      You're saying since FreeBSD doesn't have 2.5 million prepubescent screaming nerds running it, the media doesn't pay attention? That sounds like a good thing! In fact, it sounds like a new motto:

      FreeBSD: Move out of your parent's basement!

      --
      Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  11. Monitoring... by alexatrit · · Score: 3, Interesting

    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
  12. Re:You know what's *really* dead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    A BSD troll is like a retarded kid with a xylophone.

  13. Re:The purpose of this story? by Brandybuck · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's a joke. Lighten up. Sheesh...

    --
    Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
  14. Re:Question by MarcQuadra · · Score: 3, Informative

    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