Slashdot Mirror
OpenSolaris Or FreeBSD?
Norsefire writes "I am in quite a predicament. I decided a while back to branch out and use a new operating system (currently running Debian). After a bit of searching (trying Gentoo, Gobo and Arch along the way), I decided to use something that isn't Linux. Long story short: I narrowed the choices down to OpenSolaris and FreeBSD, but now I'm stuck. OpenSolaris is commercially backed by Sun, has nice enterprise-y tools in the default install, and best of all, a mature implementation of ZFS. FreeBSD is backed by a foundation, has a minimal default install and a rather new (but recently improved in the 8.0 release) implementation of ZFS, however it offers the Ports Collection (I quite like the performance boost due to compiling from source, no matter how small it might be) and a bigger community than OpenSolaris. That is just a minimal mention of the differences. I would be interested to see what the Slashdot community thinks of these two operating systems."
There is already such a thing. It's called Mac OS X.
As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
In today's day and age being so ignorant is ridiculous, when all you need to do is type a few strings in google search to get some information about things you talk about.
OS X is NOT based on BSD, it however has BSD subsystem, among others. If anything it's based on NeXTSTEP, and mach kernel.
And OS X interface bares little resemblance to original classic Mac.
Anyone that's ever even casually used OS X today agrees that if you want UNIX desktop OS today, OS X is the way to go.
Besides people whose opinion I value a lot more than your view endorse it
e.g Bill Joy on Linux and OS X
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.12/billjoy.html
"Re-implementing what I designed in 1979 is not interesting to me personally. For kids who are 20 years younger than me, Linux is a great way to cut your teeth. It's a cultural phenomenon and a business phenomenon. Mac OS X is a rock-solid system that's beautifully designed. I much prefer it to Linux."
As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
Here's why: You're asking for someone else's opinion on what OS to use, and I don't care how you slice it, you're going to get more pro-Windoze opinions than anything else. If you limit your audience to /. then all you're doing is wearing the required uniform of a nonconformist and robbing yourself of the very decision making power you portend in your post, making you clueless, in which case you should run Windows because you can't handle the root.
You have put the cart before the horse and remanded it to the duty of scapegoat messenger, because you lack the foresight to think about what mission it is that you want this computer to do. You want to be on a winning team and say YOUR OS is the one most Slashdotters recommended. You're insecure and seek the approval of a controlled majority, therefore you should use Windows.
You know how to spell ZFS but you clearly can't appreciate it because you differentiate the two sample OSes by revision number. Therefore you should run Windows, which doesn't have ZFS, and therefore you will not be burdened by silly minor revision numbers.
You are comparing an apple and an orange, and you lack the creative power to use an Apple for whatever this bizarre computer role is, therefore you deserve a lemon: Windows.
Get your ass to Fry's, you miserable piece of shit, and buy the goddamned OS that will give you a phone number to call when you can't figure out how the fuck to operate the program you buy next summer based on whatever will be hot at that time. You are a high-maintenance burden on the FOSS community and someone should be paid for putting up with your talking-the-talk from the wheelchair you need someone else to push.
Idiot.