Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Should You Use FreeBSD? Here's Some Reasons

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Kraftman
    There's digikam which is OpenSource and it's very good photo editing tool. Care to name some photo editing suites for Mac, so I will be able to compare them?
    Forgot to address this. there are lots, and don't you find it interesting that Digikam was the only real option you could come up with (and i agree digikam is decent). But I have far more (potentially better) options with MacOSX. Some obvious ones;

    Aperture, adobe stuff (lightroom, photoshop), Pixelmator, etc. There's also many freebies (you can google all this shit yourself, though) and obviously you can easily build Digikam, gimp, cinepaint, etc on a Mac via fink/macports and i think there may actually be a version of gimp that uses cocoa, although i've never used it, personally.

    The fact that i can run most of the software i would be running in Linux, on my Mac Desktop is nice, as well. So even if you were to sit here and argue by comparison, it is a moot point because on a Mac you can run most *nix apps, anyway. But putting that aside, Digikam isn't as good, and is not at feature parity nor usability to some software available for Mac. It's not like i haven't looked at this myself, being as i have both sitting in front of me.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by JanC View Post
      Modern race cars have an electronic gearbox; whether or not it shifts gears automatically is entirely dependent on how you program it.
      Yes having both ways is good, but it's very hard to disable all automation in Linux distributions and it's posssible to enable some automation in FreeBSD.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by LightBit View Post
        Yes having both ways is good, but it's very hard to disable all automation in Linux distributions and it's posssible to enable some automation in FreeBSD.
        Linux from scratch, Slackware, Gentoo, Arch Linux. To be frank, why do you really want to disable all automation?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by finalzone View Post
          Linux from scratch, Slackware, Gentoo, Arch Linux. To be frank, why do you really want to disable all automation?
          Because it's harder to configure it, than do it manually. I'm mounting manually since hal deprecation.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by LightBit View Post
            Yes having both ways is good, but it's very hard to disable all automation in Linux distributions and it's posssible to enable some automation in FreeBSD.
            You can build your LFS and get what you want, if you need that . But you see, automation is used because it's just convenient when machine offloads routine boring tasks from humans. That's why most of humans would prefer a better way of doing things so most popular distros are offloading boring and monotonous technical tasks to machine. It's computers who should serve humans, after all.

            So when selecting between "hard to disable" (Linux) and "hard to enable" (most BSDs) it's logical that I would choose Linux. And it's well known that it's easier to break (unwanted) things than construct something new :P
            Last edited by 0xBADCODE; 06-06-2012, 08:54 AM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by ninez View Post
              Sadly, Ardour2 while very stable is not at feature parity with ANY mdoren DAW. Ardour3 is in Beta, is not stable (i would know i build it at least 1-2 times a week). You had to 'search' i am already well-aware. My comment still stands, nice try though.
              Yes, I had to search, because I'm not music composer . There's also more DAW software for Linux:

              http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/cate...mixing_systems

              Quite impressive list.

              ...and yet you can't even name one IDE for linux that has similar modern feature set. Mixxx is a decent app, but it's not for Vjing. In case you don't know what VJ means, it means Visual jockey ie: mixing video and sound. and even still Mixxx isn't as good as similar apps for Mac for djing, it's not at feature parity and in reality lies somewhere in the middle.
              I can't name a single IDE for OS X that's better than Linux's IDEs. What's more important hfs+/hfsx are nightmare for programmers, so only masochists use OS X for programming. As for VJ:

              http://effectv.sourceforge.net/
              http://www.veejayhq.net/
              http://freej.dyne.org/

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ninez View Post
                They are so similar that fat32 doesn't support even have of the same features as HFS+. (go compare file-systems at wikipedia, they are not similar) nice try. Furthermore, if a file-system works for the purpose of what it is designed for - than what is the problem. And did i say anything about EXT4 before it was production ready, no i did not. i said in it's earlier days, there is a difference.
                They're similar in suckiness. Ext4 protects your data much better than hfs+/x and and it's a solid file system.

                So you think, but don't actually know their real motivations.
                BSOD on Mac was a real shame, so their motivations were clear to me. Their motivations impact on their policy in my opinion.

                Actually, it matters when it started to be used. You have been using HFS+ (non-extended) as a reason current day MacOSX sucks, yet this file-system isn't even in use and hasn't been for a decade, aside from on legacy systems.
                No, my point was OS X file system sucks. It doesn't matter if it's HFS+ or HFSx. We're talking a lot about pre-HFSx, because you brought my old post. In discussion between me and you there's no point like - OS X file system sucks, because it's not case sensitive. It sucks, because of things like journaling is some kind of wrapper and it's POSIxhit, rather than POSIX.

                It's not only according to disk utility it is according to many partitioning utilites, Mac or not.

                It's funny how you keep posting these, when we've already been over this shit. The user decides on installation of MacOSX what their partitions will be and if they are case-insensitive or case-sensitive. It's that simple.
                It's not funny, because it seems you're talking about different thing. They're not really the same. For example hfs+ with journaling is seen by OS X as hfsj. For end user they seem to be the same, because OS X utilities just show it as hfs+, but for operating system they're not the same. That's why it introduces problems and confusion.

                What don't you understand? You keeping citing users who don't seem to realize they made the choice in having a case-insenstive HFS+ partition. That is called 'human-error'. The problem is the person, not the technology.
                In that case it's indeed a human error, but if he decides to use case sensitive file system it will be hfsx, but reported as hfs+.

                I don't have to play prophet to see that Ubuntu relies on Debian and sticks (largely) to their policies. What makes me think you aren't seeing the differences between Ports and ABS? because you keep comparing them, when they are actually fairly different you didn't even know you could change version numbers in ports, among other things you've said.
                If Debian will switch to systemd Ubuntu can decide to change their policy. Ports and ABS are mainly there to compile software and this is one of the similarities. Changing version numbers in ports doesn't make them more interesting to me, because I can change versions in Arch or Gentoo as well. I realize it's not as comfortable, but still possible.

                Again, you can assert that Apple hires 'no one good', but you have nothing to back that up with, at all. Intel and Apple do have a partnership, it isn't a matter of me trying to boost their reputation - Intel is the only platform supported by MacOSX and they have a profitable working relationship and will continue too, for the foreseeable future.
                Apple targets only at desktop and mobiles and the best programmers are interested in different markets where they can work on more serious things.

                Once upon a time, IBM and Apple had a working relationship and IBM produced PPCs for Apple. This changed when Apple ported MacOSX to Intel and began doing business with them. Clearly, you don't even know some basic history here/.
                Great, but I mean support like working on a kernel and other parts of the system. If I cound all of the FSF members there won't be any more space left in this comment. I don't consider Apple being something that's worth looking at, so I'm not interested in its history too much.

                Well, i provided some examples all you can say is 'bullshit, bla bla bla'. how funny. Apple is the preferred platform for lots of this stuff. And if there are so many equivalents than how come you couldn't even list 1 (let alone listing Linux equivalents...lol
                Examples exist on every side.

                Actually, for certain markets Apple goes for in mobile - it does kill linux. Walk into any Music store (where they sell proaudio gear) and have a look around at how many proaudio companies are designing hardware specifically to be interfaced/integrated with iOS ... I do think Linux is doing great in mobile, but iOS at this point has way better apps than something like Android - with some exceptions (of course).
                It's actually opposite. It's Linux that's killing Apple - Android came later.

                By asserting that repos are 'better', yeah, i felt it was something to point out. Like i said, you are comparing Apples to oranges. and AFAIK youart is just a front-end for use with the AUR, one of many available. Why you are comparing it specifically to ports, i am not exactly sure.
                It doesn't matter if it's just a front end. It makes Arch ABS more similar to ports. However, I like ABS and Gentoo's ports much more than BSD.

                It makes it a headache, when they have made a human error, for sure. As for as linus, you did feel you needed to plea to an authority (to say otherwise now, is bullshit). And again, if it is utter crap - than how come it works, with little or no issues. (when setup properly). I'm sorry that you think this is providing concise technical data to support you postion, but it is not, and i have no choice now but to mark your opinions on the matter as invalid.
                I gave you some real examples. Imagine you want to run one application that's case sensitive and some other that's not. Will you make two different partitions?

                So by shitload, you mean transgaming (one example). LMFAO.. nice try, though.
                Many things and there's no confusion of being or not case sensitive.

                If you are talking about servers, etc, sure. But as far as Desktop applications, i haven't found anything significant on linux that can out do the same sort of application for Mac. And not even having a good video editor for linux is pathetic, when OS 9 had better facilities for this kind of thing (as one example).
                There's KDE and many Qt applications that are simply wonderfull. For me it's much better than OS X and its third party apps.

                I still stand by what i said - you are a fucking idiot ~ linux-fanboy chump.
                aPPle boY as case insensitivity is default.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by drag View Post
                  Here is how my brain translates the article



                  By 'solaris' they mean 'ZFS'. Which is fine.



                  who gives a crap?



                  The port system has you compiling software, which is miserable and terrible.



                  Yawn.



                  Oh snap. My sarcasm self-defense mechanism just kicked in. We are in for a bumpy ride now.

                  It's well-structered AND it is stable!!! OMG.



                  Wasn't this already brought up?



                  WOW.
                  ROCK SOLID! Can understand STABLE and WELL STRUCTURED. But also ROCK SOLID HANDLING OF NETWORK TRAFFIC?

                  That just blows my mind. I am a bit weak in the knees now.



                  OMG. Not only is it STABLE, WELL STRUCTURED, ROCK SOLID, it is also SYSTEM OF CHOICE?

                  NOW ONLY IF IT WAS SCALABLE AND SERVER-FOCUSED.




                  Wow. I am stunned.

                  KICK-ASS COMBO OF FEATURES?

                  and

                  VERY SERVER-FOCUSED?

                  It seems that both of these concepts deserve their own bullet points. Why combine both of these excellect comments in one line. Each point deserves their own sentence! FreeBSD utterly overflows.




                  Man. Nobody like automated brainfucks. Linux must suck. I hate to imagine what would happen if I tried to install Linux to my laptop and then it came to life to perform a automated brain fuck on me. That sounds very uncomfortable.



                  Does this mean that I have to glue together my installation cdrom for Linux? That sounds like it would be difficult.



                  Yes. I can tell this by the highly technical and thoughtful post that it lacks fragmentation.



                  Yes. Everybody loves high quality development.



                  There is the final piece of the puzzle!!!!


                  FreeBSD is a NONFRAGMENTED ROCK SOLID COMBO OF WELL STRUCTURED STABLE SCALABLE SERVER ORIENTED FEATURES that is THE SYSTEM OF CHOICE FOR NETWORKING PERFORMANCE that isn't Linux and it's not even going to try to brainfuck you!

                  What more can you ask for? It's SCIENCE!


                  PORTS!
                  +1 Internets to you sir!

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X