Re: Best way to switch from Linux to BSD

--On March 29, 2011 7:27:26 PM +0200 Michal Varga <varga.michal@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

_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"