Slashdot Mirror
FreeBSD June-December Status Reports
An anonymous reader wrote in to say that "FreeBSD just published status reports covering June to December '04 with many interesting details about the work that went into 5-STABLE and a look ahead on plans and projects for 6-CURRENT."
For Linux users like me, take a look at this to see how BSD compares to Linux from a BSD point of view.
l in ux/bsd4linux1.php
http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4
Right. Because obviously it was SO funny the other 10 million times we saw it last month, your using it has got to be even funnier. As well as the 1000 or so encores of the same we'll see on this thread.
*yawn*
Considering that the lame "joke" has no basis in reality, I wonder just why the people who continue to toss it around do so. Desperation? Jealousy? Do they feel threatened? Who knows.
Either way, it's a badge of lameness. Too bad the people using it can't figure that out.
1) BSD makes a lousy desktop.
...apply some sane policies to configuration, (disable telnet, etc) and it's quite secure.
It's running on my work and home desktop and my laptop. It runs KDE and GNOME, with all the bells and whistles, with absolutely no problems.
2) BSD doesn't do SMP gracefully.
First, it does do SMP just fine. Second, you probably don't even have an SMP machine on your desktop anyway. People don't need SMP on their destkop. And yes, you're talking about the desktop, because that's what your very first question was about. For some servers SMP is important. Good news is that FreeBSD supports it just fine.
3) BSD doesn't have the mindshare of Linux
So what? Linux doesn't have the mindshare of Windows, so why aren't you using Windows? All the popular stylish people are using Windows, why don't you to?
4) Getting to know BSD would require getting comfortable with a new administration system for startup, shutdown, and package management.
This is a stupid argument. Replace "BSD" with the name of any Linux distribution. "Oh poor me! I can't use [Debian|Slackware|SuSE|Mandrake] because I would have to learn a new adminstration system. Oh boo hoo!"
5) As of Redhat 7.x, Linux is "good enough"(tm) and getting better fast.
Some of us don't want "good enough." Some of us prefer "damned fine and strutting like she knows it!" Far be it for me to stick up for Linux, but she deserves a lot more respect from you than merely "good enough". Sheesh.
Side note: telnet is disabled by default in FreeBSD. It comes secure out of the box. It's not perfect, but for a tenth the work you would have to do on a telnet-by-default distro you could have FreeBSD locked down as tight as anything.
6) BSD has much more limited hardware compatability, and drivers for "cool stuff" can be hard to find.
If you want "cool stuff", then stick with Windows. I understand it has drivers for ALL the "cool stuff". On the other hand, if you want drivers for all the boring stuff you use every day, then FreeBSD will have them.
In fact, I was not initially able to install Linux on my current home system, because at the time I built it (18 months ago) there were no Linux distros that supported SATA out of the box. But FreeBSD did. It wasn't until about six months ago that some Linux distros started shipping with SATA on by default. Many still don't.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
I don't have to mess with dependencies with RPM's, or deb's, or whatever flavor of package.
The system installer is better than what Slackware had in 1997 (when I moved to BSD).
FreeBSD is not controlled by a dictatorship (Linus, RMS, et'all).
The GPL has a major restriction that what it links with must also be GPL, and that sucks. BSD is way more altruistic to the notion of "no strings attached" open source.
The same people working on the kernel also work on the C/C++ library's, and the userland. There isn't a zillion loose canons developing in different directions.
Updating a freebsd system (3rd party packages) is much easier with the ports system, and it is FRee. You dont' have to pay a subscription to use up2date, or have a local satellite server.
Staying current (base system) with fbsd is much easier with the various source code syncronization systems.
I can run all the Linux apps I want on FreeBSD.
sysVr4 style init system is lame, and cause you to edit a zillion startup scripts, where in BSD you just drop the changes for your system in rc.conf.
I can use whatever desktop system I want, including a fully loaded KDE, or Gnome. I use fluxbox myself.
acceptance of good ideas, and rejection of bad ideas by a congress of fbsd commiters. This keeps fbsd on the cutting edge, and maintains stability.
Documentation! FreeBSD has the best docs of any Unix like system around.
Finally, to those Finux users who think they are 31337 because they joined a smaller group of computer power users, just try to put your self in the perspective of any FreeBSD user that migrated away from Linux to get away from you (the hoard of crying windows haters)! Linux has become diluted with wanna-be's looking to be l33t.
It isn't a lie if you belive it.
Well, I don't think grandparent was a troll, but it was (is still) -5 uninformed. What you have to do to run kde is install it from the first CD (takes 5 minutes). Or, you can: pkg_add -r kde. AND you have a choice to install it from ports, compiling it for your specific hardware with optimizations. All it takes is one command: portinstall kde - if you want everything but the kitchen sync, or if you want a streamlined kde: portinstall kde-light.
learn more... it's not that difficult.