FreeBSD & Linux distro

Chad Perrin perrin at
Wed Feb 20 23:50:21 UTC 2008

On Wed, Feb 20, 2008 at 10:44:37AM +1000, Da Rock wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 08:49 -0700, Chad Perrin wrote:
> > 
> > The way you phrased it makes it sound like FreeBSD is simply unsuited to
> > use as a desktop system.  Contrary to that impression, I'm sending this
> > from a Thinkpad laptop with FreeBSD on it, and it's by far the best
> > "desktop" OS I've ever had the pleasure to use.
> Me too. But you have to be more enabled to get a lot of the software the
> is wanted on a desktop system working. Case in point: Gnome is not
> automatically installed (or kde or any other wm). Web browsing can be
> tricky because you have to get wrappers for plugins and so on. For you
> and me- we don't mind because we know the result will be fantastic, but
> others who just want to get on with it it can be a pain.

More enabled . . . ?

You have to be "more enabled" to use *anything* that isn't preinstalled
by the hardware vendor.  That basically means anything that isn't MS
Windows or MacOS X.  After all, Linux, FreeBSD, Plan 9 . . . none of them
are "automatically installed" on any computer, with rare exceptions.

> Therefore, I'd say a desktop version of FreeBSD would be better
> described as a workstation. Considering we're comparing to Ubuntu, I'd
> say thats a fair statement.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here.

CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ ]
McCloctnick the Lucid: "The first rule of magic is simple. Don't waste your
time waving your hands and hopping when a rock or a club will do."

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list