Originally posted by 0xBADCODE
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
BHyVe: A New Hypervisor Coming To FreeBSD 10.0
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by 0xBADCODE View PostYou see, world needs some competition. Though BSDs are really crappy competitors. They have borked GPU drivers, virtually no virtualization, almost no choice for filesystems and so on. To my taste it's completely unusable as desktop and very troublesome and restricted as server. Yet, kicking half-deads isn't a great attitude. Even if it could be tempting, granted that BSD nuts are usually extremely arrogant and ignorant (at least from my experience). And after all, direct attacks are lame. Have you ever heard about "fat trolling"? Fat trolling suxx. Thin trolling is much better in all regards
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sergio View PostWhat? I've never mentioned freedom or even Linux!
My sole point was that obviously BSD is far from being crap, as you stated on an earlier post.
What the fuck does Linux have to do here?
What the fuck if I can't get the source from Juniper?
The truth is there are tons of top-class products depending on FreeBSD,
so a lot of money is bet on FreeBSD; yet for you it is a crap OS.Last edited by 0xBADCODE; 12 February 2013, 07:03 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by systemd rulez View PostLet me explain again, all former BSD code and utils in Linux have GPL code added to them and thus are clensed and coverted to GPL code and tools.
Thats the revolutionary beauty of the GPL, it's like a spider plant. Adding GPL code to BSD or MIT code converts and liberates it from conversion to proprietary code and thus effectively make it freedom preserving GPL code.
Code:.\" @(#)e.tmac 2.31 (Berkeley) 5/21/88 .\" Modified by James Clark for use with groff. .\" .\" Copyright (c) 1988 Regents of the University of California. .\" All rights reserved. .\" .\" Redistribution and use in source and binary forms are permitted .\" provided that this notice is preserved and that due credit is given .\" to the University of California at Berkeley. The name of the University .\" may not be used to endorse or promote products derived from this .\" software without specific prior written permission. This software .\" is provided ``as is'' without express or implied warranty.
ISC dhcp software ships with a permissive license and support for Linux.
ncurses is permissively licensed, and likewise ships with support for Linux.
@0xBADCODEJust for reference: there are proprietary GUI stacks for Linux (Athene). That's basically the same as what you get from Apple with OS X, a FOSS command-line interface and kernel + proprietary GUI with some FOSS clients. Not that I care for either!
Netflix would be no more obligated to provide a client if they used Linux than they are now.
And the claim that the *BSDs had 10 more years is false: until BSD/Lite (June 1994), all BSD software was available only to those with Unix licenses (with the dubious exception of Net/2, which ostensibly should have been). By that time, Linux had reached 1.0. Linus Torvalds said that if BSD had been available when he started Linux, he would have used it instead.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by 0xBADCODE View PostAs for me it is not. Sure, some very marginal users do not need much from PC and can use this crap as desktop. I don't see any reason to force me to use this crap when there are better solutions available and they come with sources as well. So I can learn them, change them and build them. If I want or need to. And no vendor lock-in. But why Linux? Linux takes several times less times for system management than any BSDs/windows/etc. I've attempted to use FreeBSD on one of my servers and it proven to be real nightmare. There is even no real package management system in place. In Linux it's norm and it makes system management much more pleasant task. Which also takes much less of my time than it would be otherwise.
Oh, Netflix? Those DRM-inclined nuts who also require silverlight M$ crap to play their content? Oh, now answer quickly: can you use Netflix services in your "adequate" BSD desktop, then? (and then BSD guys wonder why other ppl consider them proprietary footpads).
Oh, another proprietary nuts. And of course no full source for MacOS X. And absolutely no source for iOS. So with Liunx you can try to make your phone based on Linux stack if you want to. With BSDs only Apple can. That's where we can see how BSD "freedom" differs from GPL freedom...
So, can I grab the source, learn it, change it, rebuild it and use it on Juniper hardware if I own one? No? Such a pity. BSD "freedom" strikes again. It turns out only Juniper haves rights and freedoms. Not their customers. Since I'm not Juniper, I see absolutely no reasons to welcome this approach. Especially granted the fact it's customer who pays money for everything. So this scheme does not looks fair to say the least.
And Linux just powers biggest, most successful startups (Google and Facebook to name a two), most of TOP500 supercomputers, millions of phones, routers, servers and so on. And even gaming industry started looking at it. So it's finally getting considered by people as OS suitable for desktops. Not something that BSDs could afford. Ironically, Linux took several percents of market in the web. BSDs had 10 more years to get there. Yet they're used thousands times less than Linux. This definitely indicates BSDs are inconvenient to use and/or lack many features.
Leave a comment:
-
Like i said, BSD users saying that BSD is right for them is equal to saying: "I prefer to be raped because I find it much more interesting then not being raped".
Sure people should be admitted to mental hospitals immediately.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sergio View PostFor me it is adecuate for desktop, as is Linux;
for NetFlix and huge ISP's and hosting companies it is superb for server;
for Apple it is good as a base system (in union with Mach);
for Juniper it is great for embedded products;
for McAfee it is great for their firewall product... yet for you it is crap.Last edited by 0xBADCODE; 12 February 2013, 08:06 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by systemd rulez View PostLet me explain again, all former BSD code and utils in Linux have GPL code added to them and thus are clensed and coverted to GPL code and tools.
Thats the revolutionary beauty of the GPL, it's like a spider plant. Adding GPL code to BSD or MIT code converts and liberates it from conversion to proprietary code and thus effectively make it freedom preserving GPL code.
Only that that would be a level up for you, since Microsoft at least tries a little bit to let their FUD look like the truth, which seems to be way about your horizon.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Sergio View PostFor me it is adecuate for desktop, as is Linux; for NetFlix and huge ISP's and hosting companies it is superb for server; for Apple it is good as a base system (in union with Mach); for Juniper it is great for embedded products; for McAfee it is great for their firewall product... yet for you it is crap.
It's quite ridiculous and it throws into question the sanity and normality of the people saying that. And most others will find it creepy or even sickening.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by 0xBADCODE View PostYou see, world needs some competition. Though BSDs are really crappy competitors. They have borked GPU drivers, virtually no virtualization, almost no choice for filesystems and so on. To my taste it's completely unusable as desktop and very troublesome and restricted as server. Yet, kicking half-deads isn't a great attitude. Even if it could be tempting, granted that BSD nuts are usually extremely arrogant and ignorant (at least from my experience). And after all, direct attacks are lame. Have you ever heard about "fat trolling"? Fat trolling suxx. Thin trolling is much better in all regards
I do not understand the difference between fat and thin trolling. Please elaborate. Thanks
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: