Explaining FreeBSD features

[Erich Dollansky]

Hi,

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> 
>>
>>Let's say this:
>>
>>Multi-threaded SMP architecture capable of executing the kernel 
>>in parallel on multiple processors, and with kernel preemption, 
>>allowing high priority kernel tasks to preempt other kernel 
>>activity, reducing latency. This includes a multi-threaded 
>>network stack and a multi-threaded virtual memory subsystem. 
>>With FreeBSD 6.x, support for a fully parallel VFS allows the 
>>UFS file system to run on multiple processors simultaneously, 
>>permitting load sharing of CPU-intensive I/O optimization.
>>
>>In the real world, that ought to sound more like:
>>
>>FreeBSD includes support for symmetric multiprocessing and 
>>multithreading. This makes the kernel lock down levels of 
>>interfaces and buffers, minimizing the chance of threads on 
>>different processors blocking each other, to give maximum 
>>performance on multiprocessor systems.
>>
The same old question pops up: what is the target audience.
> 
> You see, the problem is that FreeBSD is not a general computer
> operating system product.  It is a very specific product in fact.
> 
What is then the difference to Windows in this case?

> FreeBSD is targeted at 2 main groups of people:
> 
FreeBSD is used by the two groups. But it is not said that it could not 
be used by the third group.

> 3) People who barely know how to push a button who have a problem
> they need to fix with a computer operating system, and they
> really don't care if they understand how the fix works as long
> as it works.
> 
I do not think that it the design of Windows which makes it target. It 
is the kind of support people with no knowledge get which makes it.
> 
> This gives rise to a rather serious Catch-22 with FreeBSD:
> 
> You need to really understand intimately how FreeBSD works
> and how computer software that runs on it works in order to
> get it to work well enough for you to learn intimately how it
> works.
> 
I do not think so.

If people with no knowledge would get proper answers when they run into 
problems instead of the hint to read the manual would help a lot here.

Those people will end in your group 2 which got the system setup by 
someone else.

> Windows and Linux solved this Catch-22 by dumbing-down the
> interface to their operating systems.  Thus, an ignoramus
> can get up and running with both of these systems, and that
> person can remain fat, dumb, and happy, completely ignorant
> of what he is doing, and those systems will still work enough
> to get the job done.  It may be a half-assed fix, but it is
> better than nothing.
> 
What is the difference to FreeBSD if the system is running once?

> FreeBSD by contrast, long ago decided not to do this.  For
> starters, if you dumbed-down the FreeBSD interface, then to
> most people FreeBSD wouldn't be any different than Linux
> or Windows, so why mess with it?  But, most importantly, a
> dumbed-down interface gets in the way of a knowledgeable person,
> and over time becomes a tremendous liability.
> 
There is no need for an interface like this if the people starting with 
no computer knowledge would get proper help just to get the machine up 
and running.

> With FreeBSD, the only way that a newbie can break the Catch-22 is
> old-fashioned mental elbow grease.  In short, by learning a bit
> at a time, expanding on that, and repeating the process.  It is a
> long slow way to get to know anything, but once you get there, you
> really do know everything in intimate detail.
> 
Let it tell me this way. I have a neighbour who has a Ph.D. in biology. 
If she would give me the same answer when it comes to gardening, I would 
stop gardening as I do not want to know the background. All I want to 
know is how I can get rid of a special kind of pest.

Erich