Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Reasons Why You Should Not Use FreeBSD

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

  • #21
    I use Linux instead of FreeBSD because I'm old and lazy. I used quite a few alternative operating systems in the past. BeOS was my main OS for a while, for example. It was a great experience but there were also many drawbacks which required fiddling. And fiddling is not something I want to be required to to to make an OS usable.
    I only run desktops and in the end it boils down to hardware support which is less of a problem under Linux, eg. Intel directly supports Linux while the GPU drivers have to be ported to FreeBSD at a later time.

    I do not interact with the kernel myself, so I do not care about kernel APIs and such. I rarely use the command line these days, so the 1980's GNU userland vs. BSD userland debate does not matter to me.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by bsfmig View Post
      OS X has a beautiful and elegant installer interface while ONLY ASCIIS are on BSDs.
      So what matters to you is the appearance of the installer?

      Comment


      • #23
        Because I've tried it and it was crap ? That a good enough reason.

        Now let me explain a bit ... I just installed FreeBSD on my PC , an AthlonXP with nForce2 Abit MB and on the first boot it just froze ... probably some ACPI or some driver problem. OK, no biggie , I just hard reset ( it was really frozen so no other way to do it ).
        I reboot prepared to give a shot with ACPI disabled or something and guess what .... file system got corrupted , beyond repair ... UFS something ... I've hard rebooted Linux and Windows tens of times and never was the file system beyound repair ...

        Besides Linux is exotic enough as it is , HW support is not the best and SW (proprietary ) isn't that well supported either ... FreeBSD only makes these issues worse, sometimes much worse.
        Also if I had a company I'm not sure I'd take FreeBSD seriously, performance is lacking almost all the time compared to Linux and you can't get support from a company like Red Hat or SuSe ... you can get it but I really trust these 2, especially Red Hat.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by pankkake View Post
          So what matters to you is the appearance of the installer?
          It's an indication of how much the developers of the OS care about desktop users. FreeBSD is not a desktop OS, so it's forgivable. But most people here are desktop users, and FreeBSD is even more irrelevant that Linux on that segment.

          Comment


          • #25
            It's fragmented, uses crappy license, its file system sucks, it's slow, it's old, legacy, lacking man power and automation, it's MS and Apple friendly, people from foolBSD forums are trolls etc. and Linux is stable, reliable, fast, has greatest community and license etc. If people have adblock turned on then such stupid articles won't bring you too much profit.
            1) Linux is way more fragmented with the hundreds of distros (in fact, some authors prefer to talk about "systems") compared to the couple of *BSDs
            2) Well, it's your own opinion and taste, we had enough flame wars about licensing ... and I could't see a SANE argument against the license , none (no, repeating other peoples argument without the understanding doesn't count)
            3) Which one? UFS2, ZFS, ext, fat, ?
            4) In which subsystem? please, provide proper benchmarking. Take, advice for benchmarking for nubes : http://wiki.freebsd.org/BenchmarkAdvice
            5) Well, actually 1.0 came 3 years after the first version of linux, so FreeBSD is actually younger | "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds
            6) Ambiguous term?
            7) Yes, it lacks man power for sure, but it doesn't lack automation (the tinderbox, for base and ports)
            8) Well, we are linux friendly too, remember the story of the atheros driver? (I don't want to resurrect old flames about it, really)
            9) Some of them, yes ... people at linux forums also have trolls, and in fact a quite annoying type of troll

            The rest, well, it's your opinion

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by mcirsta View Post
              Also if I had a company I'm not sure I'd take FreeBSD seriously, performance is lacking almost all the time compared to Linux and you can't get support from a company like Red Hat or SuSe ... you can get it but I really trust these 2, especially Red Hat.
              I am not sure, if this is an argument. In the company I work for, they always say "but I cannot get professional support for free Linux distributions if something goes wrong". They want me to use VMWare Hypervisor over KVM because of this, where the ESXi Hypervisor lacks driver support for recent hardware worse than FreeBSD

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by brad0 View Post
                You sure go out of your way to look like a dumbass.
                Why, because I said truth? Tell this to foolBSD dumbasses.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by LightBit View Post
                  I agree.

                  Biggest problem is Linux fanboys probably never used any other OS, except Windows.
                  No, the biggest problem are BSD fanboys who have no clue about Linux and who just troll about it. foolBSD people are the best example. They can't live without Linux.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by vertexSymphony View Post
                    1) Linux is way more fragmented with the hundreds of distros (in fact, some authors prefer to talk about "systems") compared to the couple of *BSDs
                    2) Well, it's your own opinion and taste, we had enough flame wars about licensing ... and I could't see a SANE argument against the license , none (no, repeating other peoples argument without the understanding doesn't count)
                    3) Which one? UFS2, ZFS, ext, fat, ?
                    4) In which subsystem? please, provide proper benchmarking. Take, advice for benchmarking for nubes : http://wiki.freebsd.org/BenchmarkAdvice
                    5) Well, actually 1.0 came 3 years after the first version of linux, so FreeBSD is actually younger | "If 386BSD had been available when I started on Linux, Linux would probably never had happened." Linus Torvalds
                    6) Ambiguous term?
                    7) Yes, it lacks man power for sure, but it doesn't lack automation (the tinderbox, for base and ports)
                    8) Well, we are linux friendly too, remember the story of the atheros driver? (I don't want to resurrect old flames about it, really)
                    9) Some of them, yes ... people at linux forums also have trolls, and in fact a quite annoying type of troll

                    The rest, well, it's your opinion
                    There are just few the most important Linux distributions and nobody has to care about others. When comes to license it's not competitive, so it will be always behind Linux and proprietary systems, because they can take all of the advantages and you're left alone. UFS, ext[1] and fat are real crap. If zfs is production ready in BSD then it's great, but it is not so good for desktops. FreeBSD devs used to do some benchmarking, but when Linux developers showed their own benchmarks they stopped playing in this game. There were many proper benchmarks done in the past (like DNS one), but now they're irrelevant, because they're old. Linux use in enterprise computing suggests it's faster, more stable and reliable. Some can explain it's used out there, because there are companies behind Linux, but... there are reasons why there are companies behind it and not behind BSD (keep in mind I have enterprise computing on my mind here). FreeBSD contains 30 year old code, so it's hard to tell if it is younger. When comes to automation I meant things like udev. Atheros is mainly OpenBSD merit. It's hard to find anti-BSD trolls at Linux distribution forums and I didn't ever find a Linux dev who trolls about BSD. Devs from FreeBSD trolls a lot about Linux.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by disi View Post
                      I am not sure, if this is an argument. In the company I work for, they always say "but I cannot get professional support for free Linux distributions if something goes wrong". They want me to use VMWare Hypervisor over KVM because of this, where the ESXi Hypervisor lacks driver support for recent hardware worse than FreeBSD
                      Without paying you have same support as from *BSD. When you pay you will get full support.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X