Features Coming For FreeBSD 10

[vertexSymphony]

I'm saying that there's always something about an OS which one can extrapolate into making others believe it's a better OS than another one. I even gave you the Microsoft example, how come you didn't get it?

Well, this argument can be used against the first thing you said on this thread .... admit it, Sergio && ryao gave you a terrible bitchslap.
nonetheless, some people fail to see those FreeBSD/Solaris-only features that in certain enviroments make a difference (ex: btrfs can't hold a candle to zfs) when picking one OS or another.

These operating systems have a lot to put on the table, and, as long it's that way, they're not going anywhere anytime soon ... And I'm glad to see the diversity that gets us SO dickhard when we talk about systems like linux and gnu to people new in the FOSS world

Regards.

[ryao]

Fact is that Linux has a FAR greater reach than BSD, and it continues to advance at a breakneck pace while BSD isn't apparently going anyware very fast.

Mac OS X and iOS derive significant amounts of kernel and userland code from FreeBSD, so that is not true. As far as I know, the total number of BSD-based operating systems with which the general public interacts far exceeds those containing Linux code.

The unfortunate problem with the BSD license, is that for it to be successful, everybody who works on it or uses it HAS to VOLUNTARILY contribute back to it. It depends on the HONOR system, and we all know that MOST people and organizations LACK HONOR.

The honorable thing that some of the organizations that contribute code to Linux could do with their code would be to delete it. Not everything is worth contributing, or even using. Not having a driver is often better than having one that is full of bugs. It would be better for everyone if these companies released hardware documentation instead of code.

[gamerk2]

However, by saying FreeBSD is pathetic I don't think he was talking about stability. Linux and Unix like systems are the most stable. The problem with BSD is it's always behind, because of the lack of manpower. The features that are comming to FreeBSD 10 are already present in Linux.

Translation: BSD is about where Linux was a decade ago. Therefore, Linux, a decade ago (according to some), was pathetic.

No, I'm NOT knocking Linux, but pointing out the logical fail by some here. FreeBSD is less developed, but its innards are actually quite well designed. I don't believe its out of the OS race yet.

[gamerk2]

Are you a kid? Why are you complaining to me about bugs? There's gazillions of bugs in any big project why should I bother about the one that bothers you?

Boy, imagine if every developer thought like you did...

[LightBit]

Can there not be a post about X where X is not Linux without the discussion degenerating into Linux vs X?

No, because Linux fanboys always set the fire.

[jayrulez]

Annoyed

Can there not be a post about X where X is not Linux without the discussion degenerating into Linux vs X?

For most of the topics posted that aren't about Linux, whenever I view the forums expecting insightful technical discussions in order to learn all I see are flame wars of Linux vs X, GPL vs X, etc...

It annoying and it does not help anyone.

Linux is what it is...
GPL is what it is...
X is what it is...

No amount of flame wars held on random forums will change this. I can't believe people cannot find better use for their time.

[nightmarex]

That should be promoted as a feature

lol ^ this.

BSD servers can be EXTREMELY stable, no question. As for using clang, well maybe it will catch more errors and make FreeBSD more stable for the speed trade off. *BSD to Linux is like Linux is to Windows, you trade stability for features and binary blobs along the way, you have to decide where the trade off pays off best for you.

[Sergio]

Linux usually owns netcraft:

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2012/06/06/most-reliable-hosting-company-sites-in-may-2012.html

However, by saying FreeBSD is pathetic I don't think he was talking about stability. Linux and Unix like systems are the most stable. The problem with BSD is it's always behind, because of the lack of manpower. The features that are comming to FreeBSD 10 are already present in Linux.



Will this shut up people who complain about PA and say it's a layer? What's more funny Windows and OS X are also using something like this, so if everyone is using such layer now, people should shut up, right?

What for? To take a look at meaningless and unfair comparison (KDE vs Unity)?

Well, Linux certainly owns netcraft if you mean quantity. However, what I argued was that since january 2011, FreeBSD has ranked better than Linux in 10 out of 18 months. I argue that this proves that FreeBSD is at least as stable as Linux, since the tests obviously puts the most extreme demands on virtually every subsystem of the kernel. Moreover, since december 2010, FreeBSD wins 18 months while Linux 13 months. So, if this is not an argument showing the "rock solid" aspect of FreeBSD, and that it is even more stable than Linux, it should count as an argument showing that Linux is not more stable than FreeBSD, that is, FreeBSD is AT LEAST as stable as Linux.
About manpower... I agree the obvious advantages of this. However, with all the atention (and resources) spent on Linux by the most powerful companies, how can you measure the actual freedom of Linux? Maybe not having so much attention can be a nice thing.

[LightBit]

modern init system like systemd

FreeBSD's "outdated" init at least doesn't have 3D game engine built-in.

[LightBit]

Linux usually owns netcraft:

http://news.netcraft.com/archives/20...-may-2012.html

Because it's more popular.

However, by saying FreeBSD is pathetic I don't think he was talking about stability. Linux and Unix like systems are the most stable. The problem with BSD is it's always behind, because of the lack of manpower. The features that are comming to FreeBSD 10 are already present in Linux.


Will this shut up people who complain about PA and say it's a layer? What's more funny Windows and OS X are also using something like this, so if everyone is using such layer now, people should shut up, right?

They probably added audio server, because Linux fans are complaining about lack of "futures" (bloat) on FreeBSD. Audio server is useless layer, unless they put all audio stuff in user space.

They are trying to make BSD licensed Linux with ZFS.