Interview With the PC-BSD Team

GeekyBodhi writes "FOSSEngineer.com has an interview with a couple of guys from the PC-BSD development team after the distro recently released their first stable version 1.0. PC-BSD is built on top of FreeBSD and aims to dumb down installation and daily usage, enabling a non-technical user to run it as his primary desktop. The guys talk about their pre-release journey, features unique to PC-BSD and why a minimal installation system is a good thing."

Comments

Because...

[muddyblooz]

"We ain't TOUCHING sysinstall..."

Dumb

[Brandybuck]

...and aims to dumb down installation and daily usage...

Why the hell would I want that? I would like a simplified interface that is easier to use, but no fscking way do I want something that's dumbed down!

p.s. Of course, PC-BSD is not dumbed down. It hasn't been stupidified. The submitter should have read the article and realized that it's 100% hardcore FreeBSD. Unfortunately, the poor choice of adjective will lead many to think that this is just the BSD version of Linspire. Sigh.

So?

[Jeff DeMaagd]

If I may be so bold, if you know enough to know the difference between KDE and gnome, you aren't the target user. What matters is that it works, not whether it caters to a particular set of preferences. Even giving a neophyte choices can build up to rejection if there are too many choices that seem redundant or unimportant to them and their needs.

Re:*BSD is Dying

[laffer1]

Its only dying in your mind.

Here are the facts:

There are currently 4 bsd projects that i'm aware of. They include FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD and DragonFlyBSD. In addition to these projects which each develop their own kernel and userland, there are linux style distros PC-BSD and DesktopBSD which do not develop their own kernel or low level userland. (they add gui shit) These two track freebsd progress as well as other projects like frenzy that do live cds.

I'm also in the process of starting a BSD project based on FreeBSD 6.x which is a fork like dragonfly was. My project is aimed at developing a desktop friendly bsd from the ground up. Another words, I want to make a BSD install with x11, a window manager and basic applications as well as reasonable defaults for desktop users. Its not like PC-BSD and DesktopBSD since I will be modifying the userland and kernel. I also don't plan on using KDE like they do as KDE users are covered by their efforts. BSD on the desktop is important in part because Macs have gone up in price during the intel switch. Plus if I accomplish my goals, apple may benefit from the source anyway. Finally, I plan on leaving as much BSD licensed as possible. The other projects prefer GPL.

I don't have a website up yet, but the uri will be http://www.midnightbsd.org/ (MidnightBSD)

Re:Not just Joe Sixpack

[eno2001]

OK... what's the correct procedure to clean up the registry when an errant program makes a mess of it? Especially after you attempt to uninstall. Or... what options are there to make Windows more flexible in a heterogenous environment without using SFU? Or... What is the single most important change you can make to your Windows installation to prevent or reduce the occurrence of spyware on your system (hint: it's not spyware removal tools)? Bonus points if you can do any or all of the above free of charge. Unless someone has the right answers to those questions I don't think they can say they know much about computers. I'm not attacking you BTW. I'm bringing up the questions to point out that there's always more to learn and that there isn't much point in getting into computers unless you're always learning something. With that said, Linux and the BSDs are much better learning tools for PCs than Windows. You learn a lot more about how the system works. And that knowledge is priceless.

dpkg blues

[adolfojp]

I love PC-BSD's self contained software installer above all. It brings the simplicity and elegance of Windows and Mac software installation to the nix world.

Package managers like Synaptic don't make too much sense to me. They are great as long as every computer that you manage has a broadband connection. There are many people in the world, especially in developing nations, that can not afford that luxury. I'd much rather keep copies of software on CDs to distribute instead of having to connect every computer to a fat pipe whenever I want to install a software package. Yes, I understand that you can configure removable media as a source, but the process in not intuitive and you have to make sure that every dependency is available on the CD to begin with.

If PC-BSD were to release a GNOME centric version of its software I would switch all of my machines in a heartbeat.

Re:dpkg blues

[mpeg4codec]

On Debian-based systems, you can have multiple apt sources. That means that you can have several CDs [or DVDs] of software that is typically installed and fail over to net install when you want something that's not on optical media.

As for a GNOME-based distro like this, download an Ubuntu CD/DVD set. It will automatically set it up to access all your discs and you can choose [or choose not] to set up access to net repositories.

Truly the best of both worlds.

Dumbed down = minimal install?

[goMac2500]

I don't think most NIX users get it. I like dumbed down installs and self configuring stuff. That said, I'm a programmer. I like dumbed down installs because I don't like wasting my time configuring everything. At the same time, I don't like installing distros which require me to track down additional software. Why not release a distro which includes a bunch of software and gui configuration tools? I mean, command line utilities are great, but I don't really want to learn them unless it's necessary. I want something that I don't have to learn, or spend much time setting up. I'm sure I might get flamed from the "you should learn how all your software you use works" crowd, but honestly, I don't want to compile, I don't want download libraries, I just want to freakin software to work. I don't want to have to spend time reading man pages, I want to hit buttons. If I decide I want to use the CLI to find tune settings, that's great, but that's not priority to getting some piece of software usable first. Dumbed down shouldn't be minimal learning curve with minimal software. Dumbed down should be minimal learning curve with more software. So far Fedora comes closest to this for me. A lot of common tasks can be done in not very much time with the gui configuration tools.

Re:Dumbed down = minimal install?

[(pvb)charon]

> I'm a programmer.
> (...) but honestly, I don't want to compile,
I sense some trouble there...
charon

Re:*BSD is Dying

[BlueStrat]

There are currently 4 bsd projects that i'm aware of. They include FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD and DragonFlyBSD. In addition to these projects which each develop their own kernel and userland, there are linux style distros PC-BSD and DesktopBSD which do not develop their own kernel or low level userland. (they add gui shit) These two track freebsd progress as well as other projects like frenzy that do live cds.

Just to add to what you've listed, there are some lesser-known but quite interesting *BSD projects out there.

AnonymOS, an OpenBSD 3.8-based LiveCD with strong encryption and a preconfigured TOR proxy service for net anonymoity.

http://kaos.to/cms/content/view/14/32/

NeWBIE, a NetBSD-based LiveCD aimed at being a desktop LiveCD that includes the Fluxbox desktop environment.

http://arudius.sourceforge.net/

FreeeSBIE, a FreeBSD-based LiveCD (includes install script) which includes Fluxbox and XFCE4 desktop environments. The FreeSBIE toolkit to produce custom LiveCDs is even included in FreeBSDs' ports tree. (There is a Romanian-created flavor called RoFreeSBIE, links at Softpedia http://linux.softpedia.com/progDownload/RoFreeSBIE -Live-CD-Download-9067.html).

http://www.freesbie.org/

There may be other projects, but those are the ones I'm familiar with. They are all very nice, and worth a try.

As to PC-BSD, I'm more knowledgeable than the average PC user, but I found PC-BSD to be quite impressive and usable, without being too terribly dumbed-down.My G/F (Yes, I have one, but I'm 48 and also play lead guitar in a gigging and recording blues band. :-P) actually prefers it over XP or Mandriva.

The .PBI software packages aren't too numerous as yet, but there has been steady development with new .PBIs appearing at a fast enough pace that I'm sure the number will be respectable before too long.

Bravo, laffer! I wish you luck with MidnightBSD, and I'll keep checking that URL. I look forward to any new ideas being applied to FreeBSD, as it seems a very solid base, and IMHO has not been taken anywhere near its' capabilities yet as a desktop.

Cheers!

Strat

Re:Why oh why

[Just Some Guy]

I installed OpenBSD 3.9, just to test -- why did I never try bsd before in all those years, after all ? Well,.. it felt even slower -- probably because of X11 though.

OpenBSD really is slower. However, that's because of its security functionality (cryptographically random process IDs and encrypted swap, anyone?) and not because of poor design. My understanding is that a crypto accelerator board actually makes all of OpenBSD quite a lot quicker but I haven't personally used one and can't vouch for them.

I agree about FreeBSD, though. It's just plain fast.