Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why Should You Use FreeBSD? Here's Some Reasons

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

  • #76
    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
    Or it's ntfs or some other Windows part that's not optimized for SQLite. Firefox seems to be smoother on Windows when comes to graphic part, but not when your typing in the address bar.
    What if Linux isn't optimized for Firefox?


    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
    When Linux was young it was treated in similar way like BSD is being treated now.
    PROFF!?

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
      Yes, something wrong? I also meant Linus, as well. HFS+ used in OS X have been using POSIX emulation layer and maybe it's still using it. It's old and legacy crap compared to other file systems. The thing about BSOD is also true and it was a known fact that Apple deleted such threads. About being case insensitive it was also true:
      How come HFS+ supports significantly larger file-sizes and volumes than EXT4 then? care to explain that? (it's like 8 EB or something like that, can't remember). Now, if you are going to compare it to something like BTRFS or HAMMER or some file-system like that - don't bother, that is pretty much a pointless comparison, as in the example of BTRFS - it isn't even stable enough to ship as a default file-system on any distro. Where as HFS+ has been stable since 1998, and is actually fairly comparable to something like EXT4, in many areas but EXT4 also has the odd feature HFS+ does not (being as EXT4 is aimed at markets that HFS+ is really not).

      I can google MacOSX BSOD and find postings in apple's forums / i can also search their forums directly and find them. I don't know Apple's policies regarding their forums, but it doesn't really matter.... by your logic i shouldn't have been able to even find a single post on the subject, especially since some appeared to be somewhat old. If you don't believe me, go there yourself;

      https://discussions.apple.com/search...nkBy=relevance

      this was a pretty generic search, but i bet i could turn up lots more (some of these date back to 2007 - shouldn't they have been deleted by now??).

      AHAHAHAHA - that article says it DOES support Case-sensitivity. And unlike you (who obviously doesn't have MacOSX i do).

      To quote that article;

      Originally posted by Dave Winter
      Mac OS X/HFS+ case-insensitive? Why?

      I just found out that HFS+, the preferred file system for Mac OS X, is case-insensitive when it comes to files and directories. I don't understand why? It's sure as hell causing issues with stuff I'm copying from my Ubuntu PC.

      Just seems like a dumb idea.
      ...and even more hilarious - you think this is evidence to support your claims. What a laughable joke! Even most of the comments are way out of date, off the mark.

      Furthermore, i was pointing out your old post to showcase how you moved onto another topic, when challenged on your point of view, you were also told in that thread by someone else that HFS+ gives you the option of case-sensitivity or not ~ you just choose to ignore FACTS. (and here we are years later, and you are still just as ignorant on the reality of this stuff, and are dumb enough to argue with people who KNOW better).

      ....and to further show that you are wrong -> Although, i forgot my MacBook Pro at the office on Friday (and i'm not driving for an hour to prove you wrong) - i do also have a 10.6.8 SL VM that will work just fine;



      Are you still going to argue this now, are you really that ignorant (and/or moronic)? (i would hope not). And if you are going to argue that SL is newer, and this wasn't true in 2008 - just try me bud - i still have the MacOSX 10.5 leopard ISO (release date 2007) and can boot it up into VMware and take a sceenshot. You just have no idea what you are talking about and it is PAINFULLY obvious to anyone who is ACTUALLY familiar with the technology.

      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
      I said from the end user perspective OS X is ok. End user doesn't care much about file system when he's doing nothing special.
      Um, i know lots of Mac users who have things like RAID setups and other more specialized uses. Now if we are talking about things like snapshots, sure HFS+ doesn't do that, but Apple has taken a different approach to backups, and in my experience and other people i know, it works just fine If you are expecting HFS+ to be the ideal modern server or cluster/cloud file-system, well it simply is not really designed for that. (and thus shouldn't even be compared to those file-systems). Historically, Apple is more aimed at Multimedia applications, but in the last few years have really shifted their efforts into being a developer's platform and also as usual (obviously) catering to the masses, who don't do anything beyond average computing.

      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
      While OS X is a cluster it suggests there's not enough man power to develop it on their own. Furthermore is seems Apple has to depend on some third party developers.
      Where you get the idea that Apple doesn't have the 'man power' to develop it on their own, is beyond me. Apple is fucking rich, and can hire whom ever they like - and in fact did so, when developing MacOSX. They hired some Sun Microsystems programmers initially to work alongside their own programmers, which was a good idea. If code is good and can be used / adapted and fits the purpose, almost any programmer i know would use it over starting from scratch - unless their were technical reasons to not do so. ~ ever heard the phrase "stop re-inventing the wheel", there are reasons why a statement like that exists....

      and AFAIK most if not all OSes rely on third-party developers for their platform. Look at how many companies MS has purchased over the years, those companies were '3rd parties' whose technology ultimately become apart of MS' platform (and MS bought them, instead of writing something similar from scratch, which goes back to what i said above. Unix and Linux have also relied on many third parties, this is common stuff. - how you've come to the conclusion this isn't the case, i have no clue. All i can do is laugh at how stupid that is...

      Clearly, you are just talking out your ass and don't even have a clue as to what you are talking about. You come off as just an Apple-hater.
      Last edited by ninez; 06-02-2012, 04:17 PM.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by kraftman View Post
        I think he was saying about things like dbus, udisk, udev etc. Arch Linux also provides things you have mentioned and if BSD ports provides the same they're much less stable than Debian or RHEL. So BSD with up to date ports sucks for servers.
        That's nice, but ports is nothing like the rolling release of Arch. The kernel and toolchain doesn't change (apart from security updates, of course) while you have up to date packages, it's what the desktop oriented LTS releases should (but don't) provide.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
          That's nice, but ports is nothing like the rolling release of Arch. The kernel and toolchain doesn't change (apart from security updates, of course) while you have up to date packages, it's what the desktop oriented LTS releases should (but don't) provide.
          +1

          ABS (Arch build system) isn't the same as ports, although they both provide an automated way of building software. They both use build-scripts to do this, but aside from that they inherently differ in many ways. (not even including whether or not the kernel and/or toolkit changes).

          Portage (in Gentoo) and obviously Macports (in MacOSX) actually would share a lot more in common with Ports in *BSD than Arch's ABS does.

          that is my observation anyway, having used all of them...

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by LightBit View Post
            What if Linux isn't optimized for Firefox?
            It handles SQLite quite good. Much better than Windows basing on my experience.

            PROFF!?
            You want me to proof I was in the park few years ago?

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by ninez View Post
              How come HFS+ supports significantly larger file-sizes and volumes than EXT4 then? care to explain that? (it's like 8 EB or something like that, can't remember). Now, if you are going to compare it to something like BTRFS or HAMMER or some file-system like that - don't bother, that is pretty much a pointless comparison, as in the example of BTRFS - it isn't even stable enough to ship as a default file-system on any distro. Where as HFS+ has been stable since 1998, and is actually fairly comparable to something like EXT4, in many areas but EXT4 also has the odd feature HFS+ does not (being as EXT4 is aimed at markets that HFS+ is really not).
              Why do you think support for larger file-sizes or volumes will make HFS+ better? It's only used on desktops and some not important servers. Such "features" are meaningless when comes to HFS+. We can ignore btrfs, because XFS is enough in this case.

              I can google MacOSX BSOD and find postings in apple's forums / i can also search their forums directly and find them. I don't know Apple's policies regarding their forums, but it doesn't really matter.... by your logic i shouldn't have been able to even find a single post on the subject, especially since some appeared to be somewhat old. If you don't believe me, go there yourself;
              There's something wrong with your logic. How can you find something on their forums when it was deleted? Here's one example:

              http://support.apple.com/kb/TS1545

              AHAHAHAHA - that article says it DOES support Case-sensitivity. And unlike you (who obviously doesn't have MacOSX i do).

              To quote that article;

              ...and even more hilarious - you think this is evidence to support your claims. What a laughable joke! Even most of the comments are way out of date, off the mark.
              Where do you see in this article it's case sensitive? Yes, comments are out of date, because you brought very old post, so I just wanted to show you I was right then.

              Mac OS X/HFS+ case-insensitive? Why?

              I just found out that HFS+, the preferred file system for Mac OS X, is case-insensitive when it comes to files and directories. I don't understand why? It's sure as hell causing issues with stuff I'm copying from my Ubuntu PC.

              Just seems like a dumb idea.
              Furthermore, i was pointing out your old post to showcase how you moved onto another topic, when challenged on your point of view, you were also told in that thread by someone else that HFS+ gives you the option of case-sensitivity or not ~ you just choose to ignore FACTS. (and here we are years later, and you are still just as ignorant on the reality of this stuff, and are dumb enough to argue with people who KNOW better).

              ....and to further show that you are wrong -> Although, i forgot my MacBook Pro at the office on Friday (and i'm not driving for an hour to prove you wrong) - i do also have a 10.6.8 SL VM that will work just fine;



              Are you still going to argue this now, are you really that ignorant (and/or moronic)? (i would hope not). And if you are going to argue that SL is newer, and this wasn't true in 2008 - just try me bud - i still have the MacOSX 10.5 leopard ISO (release date 2007) and can boot it up into VMware and take a sceenshot. You just have no idea what you are talking about and it is PAINFULLY obvious to anyone who is ACTUALLY familiar with the technology.
              Good jokes about "technology". It's wrong word when used in conjunction with Apple products. To answer to your funny post:

              HFS (Mac OS Standard), HFS+ (Mac OS Extended) and HFSX (Mac OS Extended with case sensitive file names).
              Where you get the idea that Apple doesn't have the 'man power' to develop it on their own, is beyond me. Apple is fucking rich, and can hire whom ever they like - and in fact did so, when developing MacOSX. They hired some Sun Microsystems programmers initially to work alongside their own programmers, which was a good idea. If code is good and can be used / adapted and fits the purpose, almost any programmer i know would use it over starting from scratch - unless their were technical reasons to not do so. ~ ever heard the phrase "stop re-inventing the wheel", there are reasons why a statement like that exists....
              Being rich doesn't mean they have enough man power. Linus rejected to work with them and other specialists work for different companies. Apple only makes home systems and irrelevant servers.

              and AFAIK most if not all OSes rely on third-party developers for their platform. Look at how many companies MS has purchased over the years, those companies were '3rd parties' whose technology ultimately become apart of MS' platform (and MS bought them, instead of writing something similar from scratch, which goes back to what i said above. Unix and Linux have also relied on many third parties, this is common stuff. - how you've come to the conclusion this isn't the case, i have no clue. All i can do is laugh at how stupid that is...
              Rely on something and take something are two different things.

              Clearly, you are just talking out your ass and don't even have a clue as to what you are talking about. You come off as just an Apple-hater.
              It seems you have no clue about OS you're using.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by yogi_berra View Post
                That's nice, but ports is nothing like the rolling release of Arch. The kernel and toolchain doesn't change (apart from security updates, of course) while you have up to date packages, it's what the desktop oriented LTS releases should (but don't) provide.
                It seems something in Chakra Linux spirit. It will be great to have something like this in Ubuntu, so adding PPA's wouldn't be necessary. However, even if the toolchain doesn't change it's still bad for servers. I would prefer to keep the same versions of [L]AMP.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  It handles SQLite quite good. Much better than Windows basing on my experience.
                  I never said otherwise, but SQLite is only part of Firefox.


                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  You want me to proof I was in the park few years ago?
                  No, because it's not concern of mine.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                    Why do you think support for larger file-sizes or volumes will make HFS+ better? It's only used on desktops and some not important servers. Such "features" are meaningless when comes to HFS+. We can ignore btrfs, because XFS is enough in this case.
                    That wasn't the point of what i said. I made no claim that it was better. I was pointing out something that it can do that it has been able to to since 1998, that EXT4 can't do, when EXT4 is much newer, even though EXT4 has the odd feature it does not. (ie: they are faily relative). XFS also is similar feature-wise, and for someone going on about legacy file-systems, you do realize XFS is even older right?

                    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                    There's something wrong with your logic. How can you find something on their forums when it was deleted? Here's one example:

                    http://support.apple.com/kb/TS1545
                    Are you stupid or something. You claim Apple deletes all of the BSOD posts, i post links that show that in fact, there are lots of posts on the subject. I also stated quite clearly that i am not aware of Apple's *forum policies* - they may have had logical reasons for deleting some posts. But back to the reality of the situation, and why this originally came up ~ when you were challenged on your incorrect views in your old post (ie: provided technical docs), rather than addressing the fact that you didn't know what you were talking about, you side-stepped the issue like a little bitch and went on about how you don't trust apple, because of deleting stuff in their forum.

                    So any continuation of this chunk of the conversation is POINTLESS. I've already made myself clear on this point, i'm sorry you aren't understanding. but it is still irrelevant., and it is not my fault that you continue to make yourself look stupid.

                    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                    Where do you see in this article it's case sensitive? Yes, comments are out of date, because you brought very old post, so I just wanted to show you I was right then.
                    So you are THIS FUCKING MORONIC to continue to argue this, eh? That's fine, i can load up 10.5 (2007) which predates your link and then I can show that in fact, that blogger just didn't have a clue what he was doing. Or later this week when i upgrade a friend of a friend's 1st Gen Intel iMac (running intel-build of 10.4.11), i'll take a screenshot of disk utility from her iMac too - which is even older! The point is, HFS+ as long as i can remember allows you to choose case-sensitivity or NOT.

                    Originally posted by Dave Winter
                    I just found out that HFS+, the preferred file system for Mac OS X, is case-insensitive when it comes to files and directories. I don't understand why?
                    He may not understand why - but i do. His HFS+ partition is setup to be case-insensitive, and he has made an assumption that that was the only option.

                    That is what the article is about. He is trying to migrate data from Ubuntu and is having issue with HFS+ being case-sensitive. However, this guy is a moron essentially... HFS+ gives you the option to have the choice (if you don't like case-sensitivity - than don't use it! it's as simple as that. I guess you didn't even bother to look at my screenshot - and didn't notice that there are 4 options for HFS+ partitions;



                    In case, you didn't figure it out - the option that don't list '(case-sensitive)' are NOT case-sensitive. ie: you have a choice.

                    It absolutely blows my mind, that you would argue about a Platform, that you obviously when it comes down to it, you know jack shit about. Knowing partitioning options for HFS+ and what they are is common knowledge for anyone who has ever setup and/or administered MacOSX and/or Darwin. You're a fucking idiot!

                    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                    Good jokes about "technology". It's wrong word when used in conjunction with Apple products. To answer to your funny post:
                    ...and then he resorts to trolling, since he has no good argument and nothing even moderately smart to say. - not surprising, really.

                    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                    Being rich doesn't mean they have enough man power. Linus rejected to work with them and other specialists work for different companies. Apple only makes home systems and irrelevant servers.
                    Why should anyone care that Linus didn't want to work with Apple (because AFAIK he has his own kernel to work on). Soory, bud. I am not a Linux/linus-fanboy like yourself, so your above statement is laughable. :\ So tell me, who are these 'other specialists' - sounds pretty vague to me. You honestly think Apple doesn't employ any 1st rate programmers - wow, how dumb.

                    As far as Apple only making home computers, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see how dumb that comment is;

                    Apple is the preferred platform for Audio/Video production (film/television/music industry), Graphic designers and artists (which including the advertising, architects, web-development, news/print, etc.) Even in the inudstry i work in (Pharma) it is quite common to see our clients (doctors / medical technicians / Vets) using Mac over any other platform. - there happen to be some of the best applications in some cases, only for Mac or better with Mac. It is increasingly becoming a preferred platform for developers as well.

                    Servers will never be a market that Apple tries to push hard into.

                    Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                    Rely on something and take something are two different things.

                    It seems you have no clue about OS you're using.
                    Wrong on both counts. You haven't said anything that was even moderately accurate. You've used a blog as assertion of facts, but that blogger was wrong, straight up. It's obvious that you don't know anything about MacOSX and rely on 3rd parties (on the internet) to make your mind up. You have been incorrect on pretty muich every detail, and yet you continue to argue - when, as i said before; IT IS PAINFULLY OBVIOUS THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, TO ANYONE WHO IS FAMILIAR WITH THE PLATFORM. - almost every single post you make in these threads tends to be like that - ie: claiming that ArchBuild System is like Ports?!?! - have you even used both? (because if you had, you would KNOW they are very different).

                    As far as me not having a clue - how come it is then that i get paid good money to work as an Admin (linux/MS for nearly a decade) and also have had jobs in the past SERVICING the very OS you claim to be an expert about???? care to explain that??? you assert i know nothing about AND YET you've made it very clear that you almost never know what you are talking about. SERIOUSLY!

                    do yourself a favor and just shut it. You have ZERO expertise when it comes to MAcOSX, and probably very little know how when it comes to other nix systems, as well. You're just a linux-fanboy fucking loser. sorry about your luck.
                    Last edited by ninez; 06-03-2012, 11:54 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      It seems something in Chakra Linux spirit. It will be great to have something like this in Ubuntu, so adding PPA's wouldn't be necessary. However, even if the toolchain doesn't change it's still bad for servers. I would prefer to keep the same versions of [L]AMP.
                      Ports/BSD is nothing like Chakra. (not even in spirit)

                      ..and i highly doubt ubuntu plans to implement that feature set. that seems pretty unlikely.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                        However, even if the toolchain doesn't change it's still bad for servers. I would prefer to keep the same versions of [L]AMP.
                        I've never had a problem with it as a fileserver/intranet web/git host. Oh and there is nothing forcing you to change version numbers in ports, but the option is there to install the latest wordpress or whatnot.

                        Ubuntu won't adopt updated userland packages because they are too married to Debian's idiocy.

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by LightBit View Post
                          I never said otherwise, but SQLite is only part of Firefox.
                          Yes, it's a part and I was talking about this part exactly.



                          No, because it's not concern of mine.
                          It's impossible. The same as proof something what you have seen years ago.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                            It's impossible. The same as proof something what you have seen years ago.
                            Mail list archive?

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              apple children trolling

                              Originally posted by ninez View Post
                              That wasn't the point of what i said. I made no claim that it was better. I was pointing out something that it can do that it has been able to to since 1998, that EXT4 can't do, when EXT4 is much newer, even though EXT4 has the odd feature it does not. (ie: they are faily relative). XFS also is similar feature-wise, and for someone going on about legacy file-systems, you do realize XFS is even older right?
                              Who cares what such crappy file system could do in 1998? Ext4 kills this crap in every sane way. Only idiots will use hfs+ with few Tera byte files. Thankfully, such idiots don't exist. hfs+ is terribly broken.

                              Are you stupid or something. You claim Apple deletes all of the BSOD posts, i post links that show that in fact, there are lots of posts on the subject. I also stated quite clearly that i am not aware of Apple's *forum policies* - they may have had logical reasons for deleting some posts. But back to the reality of the situation, and why this originally came up ~ when you were challenged on your incorrect views in your old post (ie: provided technical docs), rather than addressing the fact that you didn't know what you were talking about, you side-stepped the issue like a little bitch and went on about how you don't trust apple, because of deleting stuff in their forum.
                              No, but you look like a stupid to me. I didn't claim they deleted all of the BSOD posts.

                              So any continuation of this chunk of the conversation is POINTLESS. I've already made myself clear on this point, i'm sorry you aren't understanding. but it is still irrelevant., and it is not my fault that you continue to make yourself look stupid.
                              It seems the problem lays in your head.

                              So you are THIS FUCKING MORONIC to continue to argue this, eh? That's fine, i can load up 10.5 (2007) which predates your link and then I can show that in fact, that blogger just didn't have a clue what he was doing. Or later this week when i upgrade a friend of a friend's 1st Gen Intel iMac (running intel-build of 10.4.11), i'll take a screenshot of disk utility from her iMac too - which is even older! The point is, HFS+ as long as i can remember allows you to choose case-sensitivity or NOT.
                              No, but it seems you're so moronic that you don't get obvious things. The talk was about hfs+ if you still don't get it. It's hfsx that allows you to do such thing.

                              He may not understand why - but i do. His HFS+ partition is setup to be case-insensitive, and he has made an assumption that that was the only option.
                              I believe he understands much more than you do. Looking at your ugly picture it seems when you decide OS X to be case-sensitive the hfsx is being chosen. It's such simple.

                              It absolutely blows my mind, that you would argue about a Platform, that you obviously when it comes down to it, you know jack shit about. Knowing partitioning options for HFS+ and what they are is common knowledge for anyone who has ever setup and/or administered MacOSX and/or Darwin. You're a fucking idiot!
                              You don't have a clue about OS X partitions, so "you're a fucking idiot!" pal.

                              Why should anyone care that Linus didn't want to work with Apple (because AFAIK he has his own kernel to work on). Soory, bud. I am not a Linux/linus-fanboy like yourself, so your above statement is laughable. :\ So tell me, who are these 'other specialists' - sounds pretty vague to me. You honestly think Apple doesn't employ any 1st rate programmers - wow, how dumb.
                              You should ask Jobs in the past, because he did care. You're a stupid OS X fanboy that knows nothing about OS X. That's a shame. Those others are working for IBM, Red Hat, Novell, Oracle, Intel and they don't give a shit about your toy OS. Looking at OS X as a whole I wouldn't risk my reputation to work on it. They probably feel the same.

                              Apple is the preferred platform for Audio/Video production (film/television/music industry), Graphic designers and artists (which including the advertising, architects, web-development, news/print, etc.) Even in the inudstry i work in (Pharma) it is quite common to see our clients (doctors / medical technicians / Vets) using Mac over any other platform. - there happen to be some of the best applications in some cases, only for Mac or better with Mac. It is increasingly becoming a preferred platform for developers as well.
                              Thankfully it's Linux that's taking all of this. It will take some time, because there's software missing sometimes, but it's natural it will replace OS X. There are no best applications only for Mac or better with Mac.

                              Servers will never be a market that Apple tries to push hard into.
                              I know, because they're lost. The only market they can keep pushing is desktop and mobile. Other markets stay out of their range.

                              Wrong on both counts. You haven't said anything that was even moderately accurate. You've used a blog as assertion of facts, but that blogger was wrong, straight up. It's obvious that you don't know anything about MacOSX and rely on 3rd parties (on the internet) to make your mind up. You have been incorrect on pretty muich every detail, and yet you continue to argue - when, as i said before; IT IS PAINFULLY OBVIOUS THAT YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, TO ANYONE WHO IS FAMILIAR WITH THE PLATFORM. - almost every single post you make in these threads tends to be like that - ie: claiming that ArchBuild System is like Ports?!?! - have you even used both? (because if you had, you would KNOW they are very different).
                              hfsx. ArchBuild is similar to ports and it's far better for me. The same about Gentoo. However, the best are Linux repositories.

                              As far as me not having a clue - how come it is then that i get paid good money to work as an Admin (linux/MS for nearly a decade) and also have had jobs in the past SERVICING the very OS you claim to be an expert about???? care to explain that??? you assert i know nothing about AND YET you've made it very clear that you almost never know what you are talking about. SERIOUSLY!
                              It's like teaching a monkey to throw some bananas at tourists. It doesn't need to be intelligent.

                              do yourself a favor and just shut it. You have ZERO expertise when it comes to MAcOSX, and probably very little know how when it comes to other nix systems, as well. You're just a linux-fanboy fucking loser. sorry about your luck.
                              Why? I think I'm right, so why should I shut up? To let you keep dreaming, apple boy? I promised little more about how crappy hfs+ is. It's not only using POSIX emulation, but it seems it emulates journaling as well.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by LightBit View Post
                                Mail list archive?
                                About past I meant BSD users and their attitude. Even if I would talking about developers I wouldn't waste my time to search through mailing lists...

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X