OS to replace FreeBSD

Aryeh Friedman aryeh.friedman at gmail.com
Sat Mar 20 00:33:26 UTC 2021

On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 8:04 PM Weaver <weaver at riseup.net> wrote:

> On 20-03-2021 09:41, Aryeh Friedman wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 7:06 PM Weaver <weaver at riseup.net> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I've been using Unix for over 20 years, and I wouldn't know how to
> >> recompile a kernel and, at present, anyway, have no desire to know.
> >> I use it for my business - technical writing and instructional design -
> >> and, literally have no time to dig beneath the surface.
> >> I've learnt one or two things along the way, and will probably learn
> >> more as time goes on, but the direction your knowledge takes is as
> >> variable as the individual and their needs and inclination.
> >> Ralf has it spot on.
> >> You're arrogant.
> >>
> On 20-03-2021 09:41, Aryeh Friedman wrote:
>     On Fri, Mar 19, 2021 at 7:06 PM Weaver <weaver at riseup.net>
> wrote:Show
> For what purpose?

If you're asking what I (primarily) use FreeBSD for: a) Developing web app
front ends to medical IoT devices and the related record keeping, b)
Developing a FreeBSD/bhyve centric IaaS framework with a web frontend, c)
personal use (web, on-line games, watching TV/Movies), d) the paperwork
associated with being a freelance software developer (yes word
processing/spreadsheets/etc. but note this is not my primary use of the OS
and if it was my only use I would not be using Unix except for the next
item) and e) I grew up using the command line and Unix is the only OS
family that can still be used completely from the command line

>      If you want to do word
>     processing or other tasks then use an OS designed for it like
> Windows
>     or Apple's GUI on-top of MacOSX.
> Then, in your opinion, why are these applications included in the
> package?

There are some very good pieces of software in the ports collection and
there are some awful ones, most are somewhere in between and all the open
source fall into that middle category: very helpful if you know what you
are doing already with the OS but a real burden if you don't

>     If you can't handle the command lineShow
> What a load of rubbish!

Ok then explain using a GUI alone (*ANY* GUI on *ANY* OS) do the following
given a directory of 100 related text files (say chapter sections of a book
you are writing) to find and replace every occurrence of "foo" with "ack
bar" without having to open 100 different files and repeating the same menu
item and form fill in on each one.   With the command line it is trivial
though (I will assume tcsh here):

foreach i (*)
    sed 's/foo/ack bar/g' $i>foo
    mv foo $i

Wow in 30 seconds I just did something that would have taken at least an
hour without the command line.

>     So if you call using an OS the way it was designed to be used
> arrogant
>     then go ahead call me that.
> Unix has gone way past standard C programming between a couple of
> terminals, a la the initial days of Dennis Ritchie.
> I'm sure, if he was still with us he would agree with that.
> Perhaps you need to become familiar with the term `evolution'.

I am quite familiar with the term and throughout my career have been
responsible for helping to create a number of the so called evolutions you
say I should be aware of.

You're quite entitled to restrict yourself to the command-line only
> environment.

I am not sure if I am the one that should be called arrogant because you
just showed the height of it by assuming anyone who says it is useful uses
it exclusively.   About 90% of the tasks I do are not command line but the
10% that are command line really can't easily be done any other way.   BTW
that is not 90% of my time (which is spent writing code for the above
webapps) and except for looking at the tip of the iceberg in a browser all
other aspects of the work is 10 times easier with a command line then with
a GUI (even with IDE's).

> You have no right to dictate standards for others, especially when you
> are happy to make a profit from exactly that.

I am not dictating anything I am just saying that the OS was not designed
for office use and despite the wishes of a lot of people (including me -- I
use libreoffice on FreeBSD for almost everything that most people would use
M$ Office) almost certainly will never be well suited to standard office
computing tasks being performed by non-technical people.

>     But if you mean something else then your
>     off base because I am only describing how the OS was designed to be
>     used.
> Originally.
>     Also note I do use GUI's on FreeBSD (my primary desktop
>     machine is 12.2-Release-pl3 with Xfce4 on it and I use it for all my
>     work and other uses [except some games]...
> Well, that's not exactly kosher, is it?
>     but I am in the target
>     audience of what Unix was originally designed for -- back
>     end/infrastructure software development)
> Then get rid of the GUI and dwell in your personal definition of heaven,
> and leave the rest of us hell-dwellers alone.

Due to the nature of my work I need the GUI but I also know it is not a
substitute for knowing the command line also.

But I'll jump on that level of arrogance and ignorance, every time.

For someone who claims to be a fighter of arrogance you sure make a lot of
assumptions about people that are just not right (that is almost the
definition of arrogance).

Aryeh M. Friedman, Lead Developer, http://www.PetiteCloud.org

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list