I would say that FreeBSD makes a better desktop for me because of the frequent updates to the ports tree. I like having Gnome 2.10 installed and having 2.12 probably ready a few weeks after its release.
Yes, that's why I use it as my dekstop OS as well.
My personal wish is that FreeBSD would take the same approach that OpenBSD had NetBSD have with their ports trees and create a security branch. That would give me the size of the FreeBSD ports tree with the stability of the Open/Net Trees.
A security branch wouldn't be bad, but a stable branch is what we really need. I'm very disappointed whenever I have to update my ports tree whenever I see that some port is somewhat broken or so. For example, last time I updated, there seemed to be an issue with glib (not so severe, but still an issue). That was pretty much a while ago. Haven't updated since, as I haven't had enough time. I just wish the ports Just Worked (tm). I know though that it's not an easy task.
As for the OpenBSD installer (GP post), I actually wish FreeBSD and NetBSD adopted it. It's very simple, and lets you do your job very fast. Nothing wrong with the FreeBSD and the NetBSD installers, but the OpenBSD installer seems way nicer. (Yes, I know I said I haven't used NetBSD, and it's true. But I have installed it, because I needed to double-check some bad comments I had heard about its installer - pretty much lies)
NetBSD provides a clean, minimalist, reliable Unix that's a pleasure to use.
The thing is, OpenBSD provides just as good a minimalist, clean and reliable system (note that in my opinion, the term minimalist is subjective). Heck, even FreeBSD provides a clean and reliable system (whether is minimalistic or not could be argued).
I'm willing to give it a try though. Mainly because some of the pkgsrc features seem nice. Of course I might run into other neat stuff while playing around with it:)
Yes, the old trilogy rocked. And I don't think Lucas was the one who directed the old movies. It's in the end credits somewhere. I'm quite sure it wasn't Lucas.
So, if I get this straight, this is just FreeBSD with a graphical installer that also installs some GUI apps when it's done to save you time? Good, good. Let's turn *BSD into Linux; let's create a million pretty much identical BSDs.
I'm not trying to insult its developers or goals or anything. It's just that, as pointed out in earlier comments, each BSD should have its own, distinct, goals (FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, DragonflyBSD). PC-BSD doesn't fit in.
Actually the parent post is more informative/insightful/interesting than it is funny. They should do something about IE as well. It was done for media player, afterall. It can't be that hard to do for IE. At least not hard legally-wise. Microsoft-wise, I can't know for sure.
I've been using Frisbee, but it takes forever and a day to load.
Actually it's FreeSBIE, but that's not the point. And yeah, it's rather annoying that it takes soooo long to load. I don't know what it's doing in the meantime, but I hope it's something good.
Either way, I'm glad this new LiveCD is out. Haven't tried it yet but it looks promising. And boy am I happy it doesn't go directly to X mode!:)
Here's another question: Why do you want to be "Free"? I'm just trying to understand your logic. Why is running solely Free Software so important? Or let's put it this way: why is running non-Free Software so bad?
PS. I, too, use Free Software (or OSS, whichever you prefer) because I just prefer the quality, but I don't get this "Free Software or nothing" logic.
The first one is strongly academic (making the source available with no strings attached, just requiring the user to give credits where they're due)
The new version of the BSD license states the opposite (new clause 3): "Neither the name of the ORGANIZATION nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission."
It's just that the BSD license respects the rights and wills of the author of a new program, based on some already existing program licensed under the BSDL. On the contrary, the GPL respects the rights of the original author. Each one has its own advantages...
Also, want to quote the following from the 2nd link:
""God created GPL for a reason," Swainson said in a presentation at LinuxWorld, claiming that it is the best license around."
Give me a break... "God created GPL"... Yeah. How sillier can it get? Attributing GPL to God. Come on, get serious.
Last, as the parent's topic states "can't get rid of it". They shouldn't get rid of it. It's a perfectly nice license. Actually they can't literally get rid of any license, they can just remove them from their page. Which means they're gonna be fussy about open source licenses-to-be, which sounds pretty much ironic.
In the Zend survey, 93% of respondents listed PHP as a primary language and
69% listed HTML.
Since when is HTML a programming language?
why would they put so much effort into making PHP a
complex, object-modeled language
I haven't written anything in PHP5 yet, but from what I've seen, I wouldn't call it "complex". If they find it "complex", they should just stick to HTML.
As a matter of fact, 85% of PHP users were running Windows
as their desktop operating system.
Yeah, they may run Windows as their desktop OS, but that doesn't stand for anything. Sure, they might usually check out their newest scripts in their desktop, but they all pretty much end up in their server, which is probably running some *NIX.
A hypertext preprocessor doesn't require an object model as complex as Java, especially when hardly any members of the community use Java
So? As long as the engine doesn't become slow or very resource hungry, more features are always welcome; the new OO model might help someone write better (e.g. cleaner) PHP code. If you don't like the new OO model, then just don't use it.
What would Linus do?
What does Linus have to do with PHP? Why would be care what Linus would do, seriously? Also, about that section mentioning all Zend people driving fancy cars and stuff, and the company trying to profit. Of course it's trying to profit; it's a company! I don't know of any companies that don't have profit in mind. They make a good engine, so PHP is based on it. Are you telling me that that shouldn't have happened because Zend is a company? Think again..
Actually I think speed and reliability would be more important there.
- Speed because they obviously want to be the fastest search engine around - or at least the mostly used one, which depends heavily on its speed.
- Reliability because, well, they can't afford to have downtimes. Sure they keep 3 copies of everything, in their thousands of machines, but according to Murphy's laws, imagine a downtime occuring for 3 boxes at the same time; not so good...
I don't think Windows can compete with Linux (or some other *NIX) in either section.
He also says it crashed his system twice, which hasn't happened to me yet. I wonder what he tried to do.
Also, my guess is that the author of the OSNews article was influenced by distrowatch, since FreeBSD (and the other *BSDs) is listed there, along with all the linuxes, so he might have gotten confused (he doesn't seem a whole lot knowledgable about their differences)
And since when does Microsoft *really* care about security issues? Surely they could release a patch to fix that (or just wait for the next MS-Office version), but that doesn't mean they care. Nor does the fact that they released an anti-spyware app means that they care.
Feel free to prove me wrong, Microsoft can't be that bad:)
I wonder what the OpenBSD folks have to say about this...
Also, I haven't had the need to run any IBM software on my BSD (or anywhere till now), so maybe he's just making things up about about the "repeated" calls and so on. Or is he?
Since, as you say, Linus is no product reviewer, they should just stop the pointless interviews with him. However, since he's a (famous) programmer, his opinion on such facts is anything but useless.
Note that I'm not suggesting that the specific interview was pointless; on the contrary, it shows us how Linus thinks (as the great-grandparent comment's topic states).
Other than that, the interview had nothing new about it, as do most of the Linus interviews. That's what I was trying to say in my previous comment.
The thing is, Linus interviews have started to get on my nerves... This interview was intended to be about getting Linus to share his opinion about Solaris 10 going open source. It ended up as another typical Linus interview asking OT questions, or Linux-only related questions.
I don't doubt that Linus (and Linux) has affected the world, but we've seen enough interviews in which Linus talks about the development of Linux; we don't want another one.
Slashdot Mirror
As for the OpenBSD installer (GP post), I actually wish FreeBSD and NetBSD adopted it. It's very simple, and lets you do your job very fast. Nothing wrong with the FreeBSD and the NetBSD installers, but the OpenBSD installer seems way nicer. (Yes, I know I said I haven't used NetBSD, and it's true. But I have installed it, because I needed to double-check some bad comments I had heard about its installer - pretty much lies)
I'm willing to give it a try though. Mainly because some of the pkgsrc features seem nice. Of course I might run into other neat stuff while playing around with it
You can sell OSS.
Should have RTFA; didn't realise the decision was specifically for that very case.
They can't be serious. According to their own logic, whoever has a knife at home has murderer intent. Where's the common sense people?
Yes, the old trilogy rocked. And I don't think Lucas was the one who directed the old movies. It's in the end credits somewhere. I'm quite sure it wasn't Lucas.
So, if I get this straight, this is just FreeBSD with a graphical installer that also installs some GUI apps when it's done to save you time? Good, good. Let's turn *BSD into Linux; let's create a million pretty much identical BSDs.
I'm not trying to insult its developers or goals or anything. It's just that, as pointed out in earlier comments, each BSD should have its own, distinct, goals (FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, DragonflyBSD). PC-BSD doesn't fit in.
Actually the parent post is more informative/insightful/interesting than it is funny. They should do something about IE as well. It was done for media player, afterall. It can't be that hard to do for IE. At least not hard legally-wise. Microsoft-wise, I can't know for sure.
Either way, I'm glad this new LiveCD is out. Haven't tried it yet but it looks promising. And boy am I happy it doesn't go directly to X mode!
PS. I, too, use Free Software (or OSS, whichever you prefer) because I just prefer the quality, but I don't get this "Free Software or nothing" logic.
It's just that the BSD license respects the rights and wills of the author of a new program, based on some already existing program licensed under the BSDL. On the contrary, the GPL respects the rights of the original author. Each one has its own advantages...
Also, want to quote the following from the 2nd link:
""God created GPL for a reason," Swainson said in a presentation at LinuxWorld, claiming that it is the best license around."
Give me a break... "God created GPL"... Yeah. How sillier can it get? Attributing GPL to God. Come on, get serious.
Last, as the parent's topic states "can't get rid of it". They shouldn't get rid of it. It's a perfectly nice license. Actually they can't literally get rid of any license, they can just remove them from their page. Which means they're gonna be fussy about open source licenses-to-be, which sounds pretty much ironic.
Since when is HTML a programming language?
I haven't written anything in PHP5 yet, but from what I've seen, I wouldn't call it "complex". If they find it "complex", they should just stick to HTML.
Yeah, they may run Windows as their desktop OS, but that doesn't stand for anything. Sure, they might usually check out their newest scripts in their desktop, but they all pretty much end up in their server, which is probably running some *NIX.
So? As long as the engine doesn't become slow or very resource hungry, more features are always welcome; the new OO model might help someone write better (e.g. cleaner) PHP code. If you don't like the new OO model, then just don't use it.
What does Linus have to do with PHP? Why would be care what Linus would do, seriously? Also, about that section mentioning all Zend people driving fancy cars and stuff, and the company trying to profit. Of course it's trying to profit; it's a company! I don't know of any companies that don't have profit in mind. They make a good engine, so PHP is based on it. Are you telling me that that shouldn't have happened because Zend is a company? Think again..
My $0.02
I think he just talks about references to them being removed from the site.
Well someone will have to get back to sewing when the new logo is out. Definitely bad timing.
Actually I think speed and reliability would be more important there.
- Speed because they obviously want to be the fastest search engine around - or at least the mostly used one, which depends heavily on its speed.
- Reliability because, well, they can't afford to have downtimes. Sure they keep 3 copies of everything, in their thousands of machines, but according to Murphy's laws, imagine a downtime occuring for 3 boxes at the same time; not so good...
I don't think Windows can compete with Linux (or some other *NIX) in either section.
I signed yesterday, and by the time I had done it 2 new signatures were there. Now that I checked the site again, I see 1026 signatures!
:) Go beastie!
:(
Well I guess some people may have signed more than once in the petition, but they can't be too many..
Hopefully, the FreeBSD core team will keep beastie as the logo
Heck, if the logo changes, I'll to replace my "Powered by FreeBSD" logos
Shouldn't the site be slightly updated, then? At least take the "this project is dead" part out. Go Hurd!
He also says it crashed his system twice, which hasn't happened to me yet. I wonder what he tried to do.
Also, my guess is that the author of the OSNews article was influenced by distrowatch, since FreeBSD (and the other *BSDs) is listed there, along with all the linuxes, so he might have gotten confused (he doesn't seem a whole lot knowledgable about their differences)
And since when does Microsoft *really* care about security issues? Surely they could release a patch to fix that (or just wait for the next MS-Office version), but that doesn't mean they care. Nor does the fact that they released an anti-spyware app means that they care. Feel free to prove me wrong, Microsoft can't be that bad :)
The problem about that is it's Windows-only. So many *NIX users that use Firefox will stay in Firefox - not that I consider that bad.
I wonder what the OpenBSD folks have to say about this...
Also, I haven't had the need to run any IBM software on my BSD (or anywhere till now), so maybe he's just making things up about about the "repeated" calls and so on. Or is he?
So are you suggesting that the Java products be rewritten in some other language, or just stating something off-topic?
Either way: you can't compare Java to, say, Ruby... Their goals are different.
Since, as you say, Linus is no product reviewer, they should just stop the pointless interviews with him. However, since he's a (famous) programmer, his opinion on such facts is anything but useless.
Note that I'm not suggesting that the specific interview was pointless; on the contrary, it shows us how Linus thinks (as the great-grandparent comment's topic states).
Other than that, the interview had nothing new about it, as do most of the Linus interviews. That's what I was trying to say in my previous comment.
The thing is, Linus interviews have started to get on my nerves... This interview was intended to be about getting Linus to share his opinion about Solaris 10 going open source. It ended up as another typical Linus interview asking OT questions, or Linux-only related questions.
I don't doubt that Linus (and Linux) has affected the world, but we've seen enough interviews in which Linus talks about the development of Linux; we don't want another one.
I wonder how many more distros we'll have in, say, 5 years....