OpenIndiana 2020.10 Released For Continuing Where OpenSolaris Left Off

[DKJones]

Yes the *BSDs are harder to install and have less hardware support but that doesn't mean they aren't great. FreeBSD 9 or 10 powers the PS4, FreeBSD 12 powers the PS5, FreeBSD derived pfsense and OPNsense power firewalls and routers in many homes and businesses, FreeNAS/TrueNAS powers many a NAS unit and if I recall from my university storage class is maybe even the basis of a few commercial options, Juniper switches and routers use a modified FreeBSD operating system, Mac OS X ships with some FreeBSD code. OpenBSD powers many a thinkpad and has a cult following not to mention is used in many edge servers and routers and firewalls as well and is the source of many well know projects like OpenSSH and tmux. I would NEVER consider the BSDs toys.

I didn't say they weren't great, nor did I say they were toys. In fact I run OpenBSD frequently, (FreeBSD less so), because I like it and I can. But there are, as I pointed out, many ways in which they lag behind Linux on the desktop.

As for their use in MacOS, PlayStation, etc., that's because those companies prefer the BSD licensing, which allows them to develop proprietary products off the back of open source, and not because of any technical merit over Linux that the BSDs might have.

[mdedetrich]

BTW According to http://dtrace.org/blogs/bmc/2017/09/...l%20management , oracle solaris is essentially dead since they have laid of ~90% of the staff working on the product (and all management).

[aht0]

Are you ignoring the entire cult of anti-systemd users? Admittingly they're nothing more than a few toddlers having a tantrum these days.
The anti-systemd kids are just as bad as people who worship systemd (although it's hard to tell those apart from normal people who just want things standardized and usable). It's two sides of the same coin.
Also I'm pretty sure there's plenty of people here who are plenty critical of Linux. It's just that, besides the BSDs, most other alternative OSes are borderline toys. I've never really seen anyone fervently call Linux the best OS ever.
You're really over-generalizing this forum's userbase.

The fact that you put derogatory labels on people with different convictions than your own, pretty much proves my whole point. "Live and let live" is simply foreign concept for too many Linux users and for some reason many systemd enthusiasts overlap with them to the nth degree.

What I would dearly love to see is no fucking sneering, bitching, whining and shittalk in BSD & Other's subforum each time something gets posted. Thats all. It hasn't happened in over 10 years. Since Micheal doesnt seem to give a flying fuck, I have even stopped my Premium for protest.

[Volta]

The fact that you put derogatory labels on people with different convictions than your own, pretty much proves my whole point. "Live and let live" is simply foreign concept for too many Linux users and for some reason many systemd enthusiasts overlap with them to the nth degree.

What I would dearly love to see is no fucking sneering, bitching, whining and shittalk in BSD & Other's subforum each time something gets posted. Thats all. It hasn't happened in over 10 years. Since Micheal doesnt seem to give a flying fuck, I have even stopped my Premium for protest.

All of this you got, because during the years the bsd crowd was so freaking jealous and they were using every occasion to attack Linux. The same was valid for slowlaris monkeys. It's good slowlaris is already dead. Now we have anti systemd propaganda etc. There are some other niche OS threads like haiku etc. and nobody is bitching about them, because their user base is level higher than bsd and slowlaris crowd.

[swagg_boi]

BTW According to http://dtrace.org/blogs/bmc/2017/09/...l%20management , oracle solaris is essentially dead since they have laid of ~90% of the staff working on the product (and all management).

No managers?? Actually makes me jealous of those 10% of staff that remains

[k1e0x]

DKJones

I think there are some people out of touch here.

* FreeBSD is primarily a server OS:
It should not have a GUI. It's default installer is very simple and basic and that makes it nice because on install you get a very clean system with no packages installed. The base installs are all identical, this is a very very good thing and makes engineering and administration easier. It can be a desktop or workstation and that is fine but that isn't the point. Also if you compare it's installer to Ubuntu Server, the FreeBSD one is much easier and faster. There is power in simplicity.

* OpenBSD is a research OS:
Sure people use it in industry and it has some good use cases. Their philosophy is "rip it out if it's broken" though and with that kind of philosophy it's very hard to run it in production. I understand their reasoning, it's based on security and due to that we have gotten some great things like LibreSSL and OpenHTTPD. I totally respect that. However that does not make it any easier to run in production. tldr; they are a niche system, they probably always will be and they are still awesome.

* Linux isn't an OS:
Not like the above ones. It is a kernel that people can do whatever they want with.. and they do. Every idea anyone could possibly have good and bad is done in Linux and a lot of the times it can me a smoking dumpster fire of a mess because there is no consistency. (Even between RedHat version to version)

If you want *nix on the desktop go run MacOS.. that is what Unix on the desktop looks like in 2020. A lot of the base OS is FOSS too. If you can't get around the hardware / price problems, I guess there is always Ubuntu or GhostBSD.. but macos is the pinnacle of what Unix on the desktop looks like and it has all the wifi, graphics and bluetooth drivers you want for that. Also most serious people that work in Unix have mac laptops.. ever been to a convention?

Do one thing and do it well. Remember?

[kylew77]

I didn't say they weren't great, nor did I say they were toys. In fact I run OpenBSD frequently, (FreeBSD less so), because I like it and I can. But there are, as I pointed out, many ways in which they lag behind Linux on the desktop.

As for their use in MacOS, PlayStation, etc., that's because those companies prefer the BSD licensing, which allows them to develop proprietary products off the back of open source, and not because of any technical merit over Linux that the BSDs might have.

Fair enough.

[jacob]

DKJones

I think there are some people out of touch here.

* FreeBSD is primarily a server OS:
It should not have a GUI. It's default installer is very simple and basic and that makes it nice because on install you get a very clean system with no packages installed. The base installs are all identical, this is a very very good thing and makes engineering and administration easier. It can be a desktop or workstation and that is fine but that isn't the point. Also if you compare it's installer to Ubuntu Server, the FreeBSD one is much easier and faster. There is power in simplicity.

* OpenBSD is a research OS:
Sure people use it in industry and it has some good use cases. Their philosophy is "rip it out if it's broken" though and with that kind of philosophy it's very hard to run it in production. I understand their reasoning, it's based on security and due to that we have gotten some great things like LibreSSL and OpenHTTPD. I totally respect that. However that does not make it any easier to run in production. tldr; they are a niche system, they probably always will be and they are still awesome.

* Linux isn't an OS:
Not like the above ones. It is a kernel that people can do whatever they want with.. and they do. Every idea anyone could possibly have good and bad is done in Linux and a lot of the times it can me a smoking dumpster fire of a mess because there is no consistency. (Even between RedHat version to version)

If you want *nix on the desktop go run MacOS.. that is what Unix on the desktop looks like in 2020. A lot of the base OS is FOSS too. If you can't get around the hardware / price problems, I guess there is always Ubuntu or GhostBSD.. but macos is the pinnacle of what Unix on the desktop looks like and it has all the wifi, graphics and bluetooth drivers you want for that. Also most serious people that work in Unix have mac laptops.. ever been to a convention?

Do one thing and do it well. Remember?

I couldn't care less about "Unix on the desktop". What I do care about is "FOSS on the desktop" and mac is as far from that as it gets.

[DKJones]

I couldn't care less about "Unix on the desktop". What I do care about is "FOSS on the desktop" and mac is as far from that as it gets.

Exactly. There's no reason not to run FreeBSD on the desktop, since it offers browsers, desktop environments, the lot.

The UNIX underpinnings of MacOS, meanwhile, are allegedly increasingly obsolete and crufty.

Linux and BSD are Unix on the desktop; MacOS is MacOS.

[jacob]

Exactly. There's no reason not to run FreeBSD on the desktop, since it offers browsers, desktop environments, the lot.

The UNIX underpinnings of MacOS, meanwhile, are allegedly increasingly obsolete and crufty.

Linux and BSD are Unix on the desktop; MacOS is MacOS.

I think you missed my point. Linux is FOSS on the desktop, MacOS is not. Whether something is Unix or not is irrelevant to me. I would use Unix FreeBSD if it was a good desktop OS but it's not; I would use Unix MacOS if it was FOSS but it's not and I would use non-Unix Windows if it was FOSS but it's not.