Ask stupid questions and you'll get a stupid answers, was: Technological advantages over Linux

Aryeh Friedman aryeh.friedman at
Sun Jul 26 10:50:40 UTC 2020

On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 6:32 AM Jerry <jerry at> wrote:

> On Sat, 25 Jul 2020 14:56:06 -0600, @lbutlr stated:
> >On 25 Jul 2020, at 09:24, Victor Sudakov <vas at> wrote:
> >> Michael Watters wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 7/24/2020 9:39 AM, Ottavio Caruso via freebsd-questions wrote:
> >>>> Why do I have to choose between Linux and FreeBSD? Why can't I have
> >>>> both? I also use NetBSD, OpenBSD, Android, occasionally Windows.
> >>>> Am I a traitor? Am I an infidel?
> >>
> >>> While it's fun to test out and play with different OSes it makes
> >>> life much simpler if you standardize on *one* platform.  Most
> >>> organizations have standards and policies about what operating
> >>> systems are allowed on their servers.
> >>
> >> This is very true. And when it comes to choice between Linux and
> >> FreeBSD (as a company policy), despite my love for FreeBSD and long
> >> time (over 20 years) experience therewith, I find there is very
> >> little I can now rationally present as arguments to choose FreeBSD
> >> over Linux.
> >
> >The tipping point for me has been the explosion in Docker use.
> >
> >It is trivial to throw up a minimal Linux server and then load a ton
> >of docker containers on it, and that is a combination that is hard to
> >beat. I have opinions on tis, of course, but they are not relevant to
> >this.
> >
> >I setup a machine for someone to act as a HTPC using linux and a
> >half-dozen docker containers. It took about an hour, and the system is
> >largely idiot-proof. I'm not sure it would have been possible to use
> >the same software at all under FreeBSD and it certainly would have
> >taken much much longer.
> >
> >That said, I will continue to use FreeBSD for the mail server and my
> >stuff because I am used to *BSD and I find it annoying when I have to
> >switch to Linux, so the real stuff is still FreeBSD and will be. But a
> >lot of stuff is already Linux and will continue to be.
> Common sense says you should use the best tool for the job;
> unfortunately, common sense is not all that common. In relationship to
> the subject of this thread, too many users simply ignore an OS out of
> prejudice or lack of knowledge (usually both). I have been using
> computers since the mid the mid 1980's. I actually have an old 8086 PC.
> I doubt that it runs though.
> If the user is going to run "X" with "KDE" for instance, FreeBSD is
> NOT the OS of choice. Sure, you can get it to run in a depreciated
> manner, but then again I can pound a nail into a 2x4 with a
> screwdriver, but is that really the best use of the screwdriver? The
> user interested in performance will choose Linux as his tool of choice.
> Now, several mail products like Postfix, of data programs like MySQL
> run flawlessly on FreeBSD. So, in that case, all things being equal, I
> would probably choose FreeBSD to run them. Besides, it allows me to keep
> different processes separated from each other. If one unit blows up,
> the other one is still operational. Of course, cloud based operations
> come into play here, but that is another story.
> Finally, when I need to use Adobe DC or Dreamweaver or Photoshop, then I
> use a Microsoft product.
> I totally believe in in the 'KISS' principal. A computer works for me,
> not the other way around. If I purchase a gas powered vehicle, I would
> not expect it to work with diesel fuel. In my humble opinion,
> attempting to use 'X' or 'KDE' and probable most other similar
> programs on FreeBSD is just a lot of wasted effort. Of course, if you

are not interested in 100% compatibility and top performance, then
> please do continue to enjoy yourself, just don't bother bitching to
> everyone else about your problems. You knew, or should have know that
> you were not going to get optimal performance right from the start.

Only problem is both X and KDE (I use xfce4 but I do have KDE components
installed) claim they work flawlessly on *ANY* POSIX compliant machine that
has the proper graphics support.   Since I use nVidia and the hardware
vendor in this case publishes a driver specifically meant to run on FreeBSD
(which it does and in all cases but KDE and GNOME it gives excellent
performance [on par with any Linux benchmark]) there is no reason why
someone should expect them to not work with the same performance they do on
Linux.   Just saying FreeBSD is not the right OS is kicking the can down
the street and not offering any real solution to a problem the developers
of the subsystems in question claim doesn't exist (thus running them on
Linux is not a real solution either).   Thus the real bug is the
developer's claims and not the OS per se.
Aryeh M. Friedman, Lead Developer,

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list