Best way to switch from Linux to BSD
Paul Schmehl
pschmehl_lists at tx.rr.com
Tue Mar 29 19:11:10 UTC 2011
--On March 29, 2011 7:27:26 PM +0200 Michal Varga <varga.michal at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 11:43 -0500, Paul Schmehl wrote:
>
>> FreeBSD is first and foremost a server OS.
>
> Could you support your claim with some examples, please?
>
Seriously? Visit Netcraft.
>
>> Desktop support is lacking when compared to the other major OSes
>> (Windows, Mac and Linux).
>
> Here too. How is "desktop support" on FreeBSD lacking?
>
>
Just getting Xorg working correctly can be a challenge. Installing a DM
adds another layer of complexity that some find daunting.
Flash, Java, Youtube - all take extra work and in some cases (amd64) don't
work very well at all. Check the questions archives for innumerable
examples.
For a new user, printing can be difficult to get working correctly. So can
figuring out how to use a CD.
The graphics are not up to par with Windows, much less Mac OS.
I have used and continue to use numerous OSes; Windows (every OS since
Workgroups 3.0), Mac (every OS since 6.x), Ubuntu, RedHat, Slackware,
Gentoo, CentOS, OpenBSD, AIX, Solaris and FreeBSD (just to name a few), and
I can assure you that FreeBSD's desktop system is not on the same par with
the others with the exception of OpenBSD, AIX and Solaris.
I ran FreeBSD as a desktop system on my primary computer for about three
years and through several in-place upgrades (from 6.2 to 8.0) without ever
formatting and reinstalling. I've used Gnome, KDE and xfce and played
around with wm during a minimalist phase.
>> You can make it
>> work, if you want to, but that's not what its primary function is.
>
> Where can I find some detailed information about what is FreeBSD's
> "primary funtion" and what does that even mean in the first place?
>
Don't you think you're being a little silly here? I've used FreeBSD as a
server OS for over ten years and it is hands down the best OS for that
function that I have ever used. But as a desktop, it is less than stellar.
I am *not* being critical of the folks who make FreeBSD what it is, but
it's obvious to anyone who uses it that the desktop functionality is not
the primary focus.
I *love* FreeBSD. I'm a port maintainer, so that should show you the level
of commitment that I have to the OS. But a desktop OS, it ain't. It can
be made one by a skilled user, but even I got tired of having to constantly
tweak it. Upgrade Xorg and all of a sudden crap stops working again.
(Remember hal? Then hal goes away....) Upgrade KDE and it breaks
functionality. Then you troubleshoot, figure out what went wrong and get
it working again.
I now use a Mac and run FreeBSD in VMWare Fusion. Much less hassle.
>
>> If you want a user friendly desktop OS, FreeBSD is probably not your
>> best choice.
>
> Why? How is KDE, Gnome, XFCE or some potential other desktop environment
> different from the literally exactly same one running on, say, Linux?
>
If you are really serious, install Ubuntu. Then tell me you can get the
same results from the FreeBSD installer without tweaking. Launch a browser
and run flash. Try to get Java working on all web pages. Go to Youtube
and see if you can watch a video. Ubuntu does it out of the box. FreeBSD
only does it after you tweak and tweak and tweak and google and google and
google.
--
Paul Schmehl, Senior Infosec Analyst
As if it wasn't already obvious, my opinions
are my own and not those of my employer.
*******************************************
"It is as useless to argue with those who have
renounced the use of reason as to administer
medication to the dead." Thomas Jefferson
"There are some ideas so wrong that only a very
intelligent person could believe in them." George Orwell
More information about the freebsd-stable
mailing list