Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

FreeBSD Project Falls Short of Year End Funding Target By Nearly 50%

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the half-empty dept.

Businesses 245

TrueSatan writes "Perhaps a sign of our troubled times or a sign that FreeBSD is becoming less relevant to modern computing needs: the FreeBSD project has sought $500,000 by year end to allow it to continue to offer to fund and manage projects, sponsor FreeBSD events, Developer Summits and provide travel grants to FreeBSD developers. But with the end of this year fast approaching, it has raised just over $280,000, far short of its target."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Obligatory (1, Offtopic)

SwabTheDeck (1030520) | about 2 years ago | (#42235447)

a sign that BSD is becoming less relevant to modern computing needs

Obligatory remark about how Mac OS X and iOS are BSD and are used by tens of millions of people everyday, blah, blah, blah.

Re:Obligatory (5, Funny)

cheesybagel (670288) | about 2 years ago | (#42235481)

Perhaps they should ask Apple to fund them. Good luck.

Re:Obligatory (4, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about 2 years ago | (#42235961)

Perhaps they should ask Apple to fund them. Good luck.

Perhaps they should ask Apple to sue them.

It might get them some sympathy donations . . . ?

Re:Obligatory (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 2 years ago | (#42236697)

Perhaps they should ask Apple to fund them. Good luck.

Apple already funds developers working on projects that are contributed to FreeBSD. Just a few examples are LLVM, OpenBSD and Libdispatch.

Re:Obligatory (1, Funny)

OzPeter (195038) | about 2 years ago | (#42235495)

a sign that BSD is becoming less relevant to modern computing needs

Obligatory remark about how Mac OS X and iOS are BSD and are used by tens of millions of people everyday, blah, blah, blah.

With the obligatory remark about how they never give back to the community.

(Next post please add the link to the source code that Apple releases in order to refute my anti-fanboish trope)

(With any luck we will trap all the anti- and pro- Apple rants in this one thread!)

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235753)

Why can't you just check apples web site for your self? Moron?
http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-1082/ [apple.com]

Re:Obligatory (3, Funny)

OzPeter (195038) | about 2 years ago | (#42235855)

*whoooosh*

Why can't you just check apples web site for your self? Moron?

Re:Obligatory (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235511)

With less and less support of BSD all along.

That is the power of the GPL - support means support. BSD means "take it and give nothing back".

Re:Obligatory (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235939)

The BSD community must offer more assistance. As soon as BSD gets something similar to KVM I'll switch in a second. If Ubuntu represents the future of Linux i want none of it, I'll go back to BSD.

Re:Obligatory (2)

BrokenHalo (565198) | about 2 years ago | (#42236449)

If Ubuntu represents the future of Linux i want none of it, I'll go back to BSD.

Who says Ubuntu is the future of Linux? It is merely one distribution among dozens. The fact that it is the most popular at the moment is neither here nor there; during the years I have been using Linux, the previous most popular distributions have been Slackware, RedHat, Debian (and possibly Mandrake). In a year's time, the crown could pass on to some other distribution I've never heard of. (For the record, my preference is now for Arch.)

But if BSD fits your requirements, then by all means use it.

Re:Obligatory (3, Interesting)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42236503)

The BSD community must offer more assistance. As soon as BSD gets something similar to KVM I'll switch in a second. If Ubuntu represents the future of Linux i want none of it, I'll go back to BSD.

FreeBSD has native ZFS which is the one reason I'm using it at home. I thought FreeBSD could act as a xen dom0 but it seems You are right, it can't.

FreeBSD is a very nice OS and much more consistent as a whole system than any Linux distribution.

Re:Obligatory (4, Interesting)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 2 years ago | (#42236739)

As soon as BSD gets something similar to KVM I'll switch in a second.

It's already on its way. http://bhyve.org/ [bhyve.org]

Re:Obligatory (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236161)

Either it is Opposite Day in whatever land you come from, or you are a total idiot who doesn't know up from down.

The overwhelmingly obvious trend in the last 12 years has been the decline of restrictively licensed ("copyLEFT") projects in favor of genuinely free ("copyFREE") [copyfree.org] software. There's a sole noteworthy exception [slashdot.org] to this rule trend, which is the software component that produces the greatest lock-in: the Linux kernel. (I suggest you read that last linked thread in full - it has many links to details.)

GNU (1984) and Linux (1991) arrived many years before BSD became permissively licensed (1999 [wikipedia.org] ). During that gap, Linux attracted a lot of attention, attained technological superiority, and, by the end of the century, it was considered the obvious choice in open source UNIX. Linux managed to capitalize on the collapse of proprietary UNIX and attract a lot of corporate support. It beats the BSD's on almost every performance benchmark. Kudos to Linus T - he got there first, made a thousand good decisions, and beat us fair and square!

But that doesn't mean Linux will remain the king of the mountain forever. Linux is being written by the very people who its license was designed to hurt! It is a loose alliance of corps mostly trying to undermine Microsoft, and this contradiction cannot last. Linus T made the right choice by not switching to the newer more-restrictive versions of GPL, which should buy it some more time. And its jack-of-all-trades approach, trying to be the ideal kernel for everything from nano to desktops to supercomputers, will catch up to it eventually.

See, sometime in the last few years, people actually started to pay attention to licensing, as the disadvantages of GPL started to become obvious. This resulted in a shift away from copyLEFT all across the board. Many projects switched licenses (ex. Ruby) and got a new lease on life, while in many software categories new copyFREE projects started to gradually suck away GPL's market share. At the turn of the millennium there were no decent copyFREE compilers, desktop environments, or Web browsers. Today we have Clang/LLVM, E17, and Chromium (well, almost - that's why I'd rather use Opera for now). In the most competitive categories, like scripting languages and Web servers, GPL is almost entirely dead. PostgreSQL, SQLite, Redis, etc are gradually squeezing MySQL. The HTML5 stack's gains are the loss of GTK/Qt/wx/etc, as well as of FFMPEG. FreeBSD is just about finished scraping off the last remnants of copyLEFT, which would have seemed unthinkable just a few years ago - now finally I can run a complete UNIX system without any GNU!

This trend is going to continue - gradually, patiently, at times with a few steps back and sideways, but moving forward in aggregate nonetheless. History takes time to play out. Maybe it will be Haiku on portable devices, and/or DragonFly BSD on large servers, and/or a completely new copyFREE OS that's yet to be initiated. Maybe the copyFREE champion Google will pull something out of its sleeve. But, sooner or later, the Penguin Empire will fall!

--libman

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235557)

Swap BSD with FreeBSD and the statement stands.

Re:Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235645)

More code in OS X comes from NetBSD.

Obligatry Response with slight disgust (4, Insightful)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42235573)

a sign that BSD is becoming less relevant to modern computing needs

Obligatory remark about how Mac OS X and iOS are BSD and are used by tens of millions of people everyday, blah, blah, blah.

...and that does not refute the point. Mac OS took code one way; the main developers...and gave out free laptops to the others. Its an example how the spirit of sharing from BSD is not as strong as having a license enforce it. When a company gets involved with Linux the ecosystem gets stronger...not sort of meander into obscurity [and no throwing money it at in a PR stunt is not the answer]. The only sick thing is the amount of Apple users promoting BSD.

Re:Obligatry Response with slight disgust (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235681)

This is not a problem. I am sure the BSD folks are 100% ok with this. They willingly decided to release their code under a BSD license instead of a GPL license. And they are not stupid so I assume they are fully aware of the consequences of that decision. It is not as if this has never been discussed.

Re:Obligatry Response with slight disgust (4, Insightful)

Pieroxy (222434) | about 2 years ago | (#42235719)

a sign that BSD is becoming less relevant to modern computing needs

Obligatory remark about how Mac OS X and iOS are BSD and are used by tens of millions of people everyday, blah, blah, blah.

...and that does not refute the point. Mac OS took code one way; the main developers...and gave out free laptops to the others. Its an example how the spirit of sharing from BSD is not as strong as having a license enforce it. When a company gets involved with Linux the ecosystem gets stronger...not sort of meander into obscurity [and no throwing money it at in a PR stunt is not the answer]. The only sick thing is the amount of Apple users promoting BSD.

Emphasis mine. That's only your definition of strong. Have you considered the fact that maybe, just maybe, some people might not have the same definition as yours?

Re:Obligatry Response with slight disgust (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236273)

[...] Mac OS took code one way [...]

Copying is not a crime.

[...] the spirit of sharing from BSD is not as strong as having a license enforce it [...]

Violence is wrong.

[...] The only sick thing is the amount of Apple users promoting BSD [...]

I wouldn't even wipe my ass with an Apple product.

--libman

Re:Obligatory (1)

ernest.cunningham (972490) | about 2 years ago | (#42235649)

Whether its a dead OS or not, in an attempt to make me feel better about using Mac OS X and iOS I donated :P

Re:Obligatory (2, Funny)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42236543)

Whether its a dead OS or not, in an attempt to make me feel better about using Mac OS X and iOS I donated :P

isaac@xen:~$ ping -c 2 10.0.0.107
PING 10.0.0.107 (10.0.0.107) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.0.0.107: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.595 ms
64 bytes from 10.0.0.107: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.959 ms

It's certainly not a dead OS, it's running perfectly well.

Re:Obligatory (1)

chronokitsune3233 (2170390) | about 2 years ago | (#42235987)

a sign that BSD is becoming less relevant to modern computing needs

Obligatory remark about how Mac OS X and iOS are BSD and are used by tens of millions of people everyday, blah, blah, blah.

Obligatory rebuttal about how even many technical people don't really care much about the fact that an old version of FreeBSD serves as the foundation for OS X as long as they know how to administer the system and/or develop for it, blah, blah, blah.

Re:Obligatory (1)

peppepz (1311345) | about 2 years ago | (#42236039)

OS X 'is' not BSD, it's NeXTSTEP with code derived from BSD.

Re:Obligatory (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | about 2 years ago | (#42236759)

It's a combination of a lot of things, including various parts of BSD.

Finally.... (2, Funny)

identity0 (77976) | about 2 years ago | (#42235453)

After many long years on Slashdot, can I be the first one to actually confirm that FreeBSD is dead?

Re:Finally.... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235729)

No. Only Netcraft is allowed to do that.

Re:Finally.... (4, Funny)

Kergan (780543) | about 2 years ago | (#42235831)

It's. Not. Dead. Yet.

It'll return as a zombie... process?

Re:Finally.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236423)

It's just pining for the fjords

Re:Finally.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236635)

You better tell NetApp, EMC, Juniper, and Cisco.

Never met anyone who uses it. (2)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 2 years ago | (#42235499)

I have never met anyone in person who uses it. I know some must.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (3, Informative)

Melkman (82959) | about 2 years ago | (#42235567)

Well, I know people who use FreeNAS which is based on FreeBSD. I think the thought behind the BSD license is telling. It basically says you can take the code and nothing in return is expected, which is exactly what they get.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (1, Troll)

epine (68316) | about 2 years ago | (#42236043)

Well, I know people who use FreeNAS which is based on FreeBSD. I think the thought behind the BSD license is telling. It basically says you can take the code and nothing in return is expected, which is exactly what they get.

You must be a math major. An economist might have stopped to ask whether Clang/LLVM fell off a turnip wagon.

Anyone who is using FreeBSD properly soon reaches the point where they are thinking about other things they need to accomplish. You probably haven't met too many people having long conversations about their wonderfully reliable plumbing, either.

Linux seems to regard rewriting their firewall facility from scratch as a desirable social activity. Of course if you meet someone who enjoys replacing their deck every second year, you'll hear a lot more about advances in deck paint.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236211)

I may not hear others refer to their reliable plumbing that will probably outlast their home but I do hear from plenty of people that have bad plumbing, overflow issues and need their pipes cleaned.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (4, Informative)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42236639)

Well, I know people who use FreeNAS which is based on FreeBSD. I think the thought behind the BSD license is telling. It basically says you can take the code and nothing in return is expected, which is exactly what they get.

I know from personal experience that at least some big mega-corps do give stuff back to the BSD's.

I worked at a place that spent loads of money improving one of the BSDs. They gave back everything for the purely selfish reason that they could either keep maintaining their changes at a high cost or send the changes to the project and get maintance for free. The improvements to the BSD were publicly known but who funded them never was.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235631)

Like linux maybe. You/they use it without knowing.

I use it *without* knowing on my router http://www.pfsense.org and my NAS http://www.freenas.org

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (2)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42236709)

I use it *without* knowing on my router http://www.pfsense.org/ [pfsense.org] and my NAS http://www.freenas.org/ [freenas.org]

Pendantic mode - How do you know you use it without knowing? Besides the boot messages are a dead giveaway.

I used to use pfsense. It worked fine but it did seem annoyingly limited in some respects and everytime I asked how to do a thing I was told I should pay for a bounty to add some feature in the next release. It annoyed me so much I changed to OpenBSD and now write pf rules in vi. Now I know exactly what my firewall is doing, it runs a more recent version of pf, I have way more flexibility to do other things on my firewall if I choose, and pfsense can't compete with OpenBSD's security history.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (3, Interesting)

Cinder6 (894572) | about 2 years ago | (#42235659)

Obviously you've never met me (well, most likely you haven't), but I used to use FreeBSD in the early-to-mid-2000s, back before I went to OS X. I always liked it a lot--more than any of the *nixes I used, with the possible exception of Arch.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (3, Funny)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 2 years ago | (#42235677)

No, I don't think I ever met you. Nice to meet you.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236005)

I have never met anyone in person who uses it. I know some must.

I have I am sad to say... and unfortunately someone keeps deploying new instances on my network. And then leaves. With my team holding the bloody bag.

2 BSD servers, and 2 bloody Debian servers, installled by some admin that professes a hatred for Redhat.

(Despite Redhat being our organization's standard)

That's the only place I see FreeBSD these days -- unauthorized installs by some diehard.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (1)

Beetjebrak (545819) | about 2 years ago | (#42236637)

(Despite Redhat being our organization's standard) The point in time when this was decided was also the point in time your organization stopped thinking about stuff like this, right? Seriously, I'm usually not one for breaking the mold but the threat of tunnel vision is definitely there if you stop looking from side to side.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (1)

rtaylor (70602) | about 2 years ago | (#42236651)

I strongly prefer to have a different operating systems on my front-end (Apache) and database/storage (PostgreSQL) layers just to make it a touch more difficult to pull a copy of the DB.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42236725)

CentOS is my organization's standard, but sometimes there are compelling reasons to use something else.

I have no knowledge of your situation. Maybe it was just someone using what they knew best in your case.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 2 years ago | (#42236221)

FreeBSD was very popular 10 years ago. In my opinion those were its golden days.

BSD Unix golden days were 4.2 - 4.4 where TCP/IP was developed back in the early 1980s and Sun's Gossling worked on the kernel. Its freeBSD counterpart golden days were 4.0 - 4.12 before it went to shit and Linux/Ubuntu took over.

10 years ago FreeBSD was ahead of Linux and it drove me nuts to see slashdot down all the time (not so common now) as Linux couldn't scale for more than 2 cpus and crashed or halted when it had a shitload of network connections. FreeBSD could run smoothly on that old 486 just fine for thousands of connections!

FreeBSD was more user friendly (4.x and earlier) as you could go to /usr/ports/examples/cvsup and /etc and edit .sh files to do all sorts of crazy things like check your main update servers at 3am every night and sync to the ports ... just uncomment this line! FYI I last used it in 2004/2005 so I might have got that directory wrong. Linux .RC scripts are more like programs iwth if/else code than .ini files :-(

You can't really hack them as they are programs. Not things to turn on and off as easily.

Unix geeks used Linux and FreeBSD and if you bought it at any college bookstore it had a nice manual too which is my favorite unix book. It discusses how to use emacs and vi and other things much better than the crappy linux manpages. Infact, FreeBSD has /etc/share/doc with much more detailed things and its man pages were more detailed. Example man /etc would talk about that directory where no such entry was in Linux.

FreeBSD 4.0 - 4.12 will always have a place in my heart right there with the Windows fan boys loving XP as its golden age.

Today Linux has suceeded it and can now scale to 64 processors. Linux has a journaling file system now. It can do async i/o and other things that only FreeBSD could as FreeBSD became bloated and buggy. Rest in peace.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (2)

BrokenHalo (565198) | about 2 years ago | (#42236573)

Example man /etc would talk about that directory where no such entry was in Linux.

Maybe it just isn't necessary. Even BSDs get some things completely wrong:

$ man woman
No manual entry for woman
$

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236323)

Netflix

http://www.zdnet.com/blog/datacenter/netflix-delivers-using-commodity-hardware-and-open-source-software/1409

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (1)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about 2 years ago | (#42236527)

I had to programming jobs that used freebsd. and one that used netbsd. but that was many years ago. these days, all I'm seeing are linux this and linux that.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42236581)

I have never met anyone in person who uses it. I know some must.

Dammit. I use it, I was using it 10 minutes ago. I can't be alone.

I store lots of data on FreeBSD 9.0 using ZFS because I really like ZFS. I also run BackupPC for my personal stuff on it.

I also really like the handbook. One simple accessible document for most of everything is so much easier than the Linux distros.

Re:Never met anyone who uses it. (3, Interesting)

Beetjebrak (545819) | about 2 years ago | (#42236613)

FreeBSD? Right here on my laptop, my media center, my personal web and mail servers, and a hell of a lot of servers (est. 400 or so) at work. But we probably haven't met. If we have, I generally don't use my preference for FreeBSD as a conversation starter.

$500,00 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235517)

$500,00

  is that 50k or 500k?

Read the Link (1)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 2 years ago | (#42235605)

is that 50k or 500k?

Perhaps you should look at the graphic in the middle of the linked article.

Re:$500,00 (1)

alexhs (877055) | about 2 years ago | (#42235725)

Isn't that $500, ¢0 ?
Slashcode is eating the cent symbol, and a comma for decimal mark followed by two decimals is common in the whole continental Europe.

Re:$500,00 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235927)

500 usd and 0 cents. its a comma, not a decimal point.

Just miss a few zeroes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235543)

or misplace the thousands separator

user (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235589)

I used freebsd at an isp since it's 2.x release upto 6. I'm not sure if it's still used there but it served me very well for over ten years. That said I dislike the way things are being done these days. Now I'm not sure if I should donate. I've done so for every profitable year upto 2010 in quite large ammounts.

Is this newsworthy? (4, Insightful)

butlerm (3112) | about 2 years ago | (#42235603)

My first instinct is to think so what? Shouldn't non-profit foundations have ambitious fund raising targets that they fall short of most of the time? Is FreeBSD in danger of ceasing to be a viable operating system because the target wasn't met?

Re:Is this newsworthy? (4, Interesting)

Kjella (173770) | about 2 years ago | (#42236051)

My first instinct is to think so what? Shouldn't non-profit foundations have ambitious fund raising targets that they fall short of most of the time? Is FreeBSD in danger of ceasing to be a viable operating system because the target wasn't met?

Last year their target was $400k and they reached $426k so they're not intentionally making too ambitious targets. That this is an annual campaign and they're $146k short of matching last year indicates interest has dropped significantly. Looking at their donors it's now practically run by Netapp that's moved up to double platinum ($100k+), accounting for more than a third of their total donations. The more disturbing part for them should be that the donor [freebsdfoundation.org] list is much, much shorter than last year.

Re:Is this newsworthy? (4, Informative)

stephanruby (542433) | about 2 years ago | (#42236085)

Also considering that the year is not over yet, and that a third of the money usually gets raised during the last month of the year, I'd say their fundraising effort is still going pretty smoothly.

For 2011, we set a fundraising goal of $400,000 with a spending budget of $350,000. As of this publication we have raised $210,000. By this time last year, we had raised $195,000, but ended the year raising a total of $325,000. We are hoping that you, the FreeBSD community, will help us finish the year strong by making a donation this month. http://www.freebsdfoundation.org/press/2011Dec-newsletter.shtml#Fundraising [freebsdfoundation.org]

Who wants to bet that this year, they'll have fundraised $400,000 by the deadline, and that for next year -- they'll raise the target to $650,000.

Re:Is this newsworthy? (1)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 2 years ago | (#42236313)

FreeBSD... actually BSD is very newsworthy as it holds an integral part of computer history. Like other important pieces of history such as VMS, IBM 360, and other gone technologies BSD will be part of it that we owe a gratitude for.

We have the internet thanks to it. TCP/IP v. 4 came to be on BSD Unix 4.2 in the early 1980s. It is so bizaare how Linux overtook it and shocking as it took 10 years before Linux became a somewhat decent server OS that can play with the big boys from a toy. FreeBSD was already there. BSD was opensource before GNU was even around and had an academic following before linux was twinkle in Linuses eye.

In the 1990s I have heard of BSDI to run BBS and a few webservers. But not Linux. That was years later

Re:Is this newsworthy? (1)

Onymous Coward (97719) | about 2 years ago | (#42236469)

The question wasn't whether BSD was itself newsworthy.

And don't refer to it like it's only historical.

Re:Is this newsworthy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236521)

Also SMTP, FTP, Pop3, Sendmail and frankly email itself. Unlike Linux BSD is more than just a kernel.

I dont know where we would be without it.

Re:Is this newsworthy? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#42236493)

no, but less bsd nerds will get to travel on that dime.

I'm thinking maybe freebsd should add a huge banner to appear! think wikipedia.

Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (5, Informative)

urbanriot (924981) | about 2 years ago | (#42235621)

Since we made the switch to FreeBSD in 2004, providing various services such as proxying web usage or web access logging for corporations, we've never even considered another OS as it's been a rock solid performer. Thousands of users in various locations are relying on our systems and despite inept people accidentally unplugging some of them, failed UPS', failed hard drives, they ruggedly truck on without issue.

Hopefully the front page posting will encourage other FreeBSD users to donate. There's certainly more servers in production, especially some of the more reliable ones, that are using FreeBSD according to Netcraft.

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235703)

SOME of the most reliable are indeed FreeBSD. Most of the most reliable, however, are either Linux or yes even Windows.

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (0)

urbanriot (924981) | about 2 years ago | (#42235887)

Whoops, I typically forget to capslock my words. Good thing you're here for that helpful casing correction!

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236471)

Not the poster you're replying to, but that remark is just showing how touchy, bitter and petty the *BSD community really is.

I'm quite sure the poster did capitalize it for emphasis, since it's a common way to do it if you don't want to use html. (The other common one would be to use s p a c i n g, but that tends to look weird.)

I'm also pretty sure you know this damned well, just like you know you spiced up the wording to make your claims sound more impressive. You can feign innocence as much as you want, but it's pretty transparent.

I actually like *BSD but the people associated with it, constantly trying to inflate its importance and performance beyond whats warranted keeps putting me off. You fall squarely into the same category as the "OSX is FreeBSD, so FreeBSD is the most used UNIX on earth"-crowd, which means you're pathetic beyond the pale.

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (1)

Great Big Bird (1751616) | about 2 years ago | (#42235741)

I currently use FreeBSD on a student run server, but will be switching back to Linux because a lot of the ports are getting a little long in the tooth. I have otherwise enjoyed the stability of the system, but for our needs having an up to date php and apache are very useful things.

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (1)

adri (173121) | about 2 years ago | (#42235813)

.. FreeBSD person here.

Which ports in question? I was under the impression that PHP/apache ports are kept up to date in the ports tree.

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (1)

urbanriot (924981) | about 2 years ago | (#42235967)

He may be referring to Apache HTTP Server 2.4.x, discussion concerning what he's referring to can be found on forums.freebsd.org - http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=34310 [freebsd.org]

... of course, at the end of the day he can always compile from source or follow blog postings which provide a considerable amount of detail to complete this simple task. We've compiled from source many of our applications so we can customize the compiled experience to a finer degree. I may have made some ports contributions along the way as well.

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (1)

illaqueate (416118) | about 2 years ago | (#42236113)

he may also just be referring to how easier it is to install on Ubuntu just small things like installing a server will have it properly configured already meanwhile I'll install some things from a port then need to edit for what seems like forever to get things up and running assuming I can find the conf files as they aren't necessarily put in a logical place like in ubuntu

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (1)

rgbrenner (317308) | about 2 years ago | (#42236205)

Care to give an example of conf files being placed illogically in FBSD?

the directory structure is explained here:
http://www5.us.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/dirstructure.html [freebsd.org]
and every port is required to follow that structure.

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (1)

urbanriot (924981) | about 2 years ago | (#42236263)

If you're finding it difficult to find .conf files in /etc and properly constructing a sentence, then it's possible that Ubuntu Server is perfect for him or you. Especially you.

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (2)

Billly Gates (198444) | about 2 years ago | (#42236359)

I never recommend compiling from source in 2012!

SOmething complex with lots of dependencies are just going to cause problems as who the hell knows what .config files will change and crap being spewed all over the file system.

The official ports patch everything and it has to pass the FreeBSD QA and integrates with it well into the system. .deb files are similiar

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236431)

Apache is an example of where the conf files are weird in Ubuntu, actually.

Re:Some of my most reliable servers are FreeBSD... (1)

1s44c (552956) | about 2 years ago | (#42236773)

..but for our needs having an up to date php and apache are very useful things.

You might want to lookup nginx. Apache is so 2000-late.

Not to late (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235663)

You know it is not too late to chip in. Fortunately 2012 isn't over yet.

Everybody has left (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235695)

for OpenBSD!

Re:Everybody has left (1)

dan325 (1221648) | about 2 years ago | (#42235773)

I sure have. My first exposure to BSD was NetBSD and then I switched to OpenBSD several years ago and haven't looked back.

Reallocate and re-prioritize. (2, Insightful)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | about 2 years ago | (#42235739)

...the FreeBSD project has sought $500,000 by year end to allow it to continue to offer to fund and manage projects, sponsor FreeBSD events, Developer Summits and provide travel grants to FreeBSD developers.

Hmm...

  • manage projects: YES
  • sponsor FreeBSD events: NO
  • sponsor Developer Summits: NO
  • provide travel grants to FreeBSD developers: NO

Problem solved.

Re:Reallocate and re-prioritize. (1)

darthdavid (835069) | about 2 years ago | (#42235843)

Oh certainly, that can probably solve things for a year or two, depending on just how they were gonna allocate that 500k, but long term you have to remember that FreeBSD is a community project and, in the long term, sponsoring those things is part of how you make the community grow and thrive.

Re:Reallocate and re-prioritize. (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 2 years ago | (#42236507)

Oh certainly, that can probably solve things for a year or two, depending on just how they were gonna allocate that 500k, but long term you have to remember that FreeBSD is a community project and, in the long term, sponsoring those things is part of how you make the community grow and thrive.

just spend the money on beer for the summits.
people will come if you promise them free hats and beer.

have them in the summer, so you'll save on rent on a warm place(outdoor drinking in the arctic in the winter sucks, even if the beer is cold).

Re:Reallocate and re-prioritize. (1)

water-and-sewer (612923) | about 2 years ago | (#42235865)

Agreed, this is management 101. I'm not sure the funding gap reflects a loss in relevance for the platform. I chose it specifically as a platform and its suited my needs and even met them. I've never managed a better put-together *nix system. Nice when the man pages all match the software and are up to date, and the ports system is lovely. I'm not sure I'll build another Linux server again after the good experience I had with BSD (It's dictatorshandbook.net by the way, a VPS run by rockvps.com - also highly recommended, offering FreeBSD 9 images, somewhat of a rarity).

But maybe they should just funding/supporting less side activities and focus on the code.

In the meantime I'm going to write them a check. Happy Xmas!

Re:Reallocate and re-prioritize. (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | about 2 years ago | (#42235937)

Good point. Infrastructure and some office supplies for the project managers yes, hookers and blow in exotic locations, no.

Re:Reallocate and re-prioritize. (1)

TrueSatan (1709878) | about 2 years ago | (#42235995)

I can understand this in terms of setting a top priority but wouldn't each element being removed affect the short and long term viability of the project? If funding can't be provided what would be the short term and long term effects of less/no events/summits be and even if some were to be held what would be the effect of developers whose personal situation, or company support, wouldn't otherwise allow them to go then not getting a grant and, thus, not attending?

Re:Reallocate and re-prioritize. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236091)

All of that sponsorship is part of managing a globally distributed project. At some points it's hard to move forward without getting everyone in the same room.

If raising $ 1/4 million is "failure" (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42235805)

then perhaps there's a problem with the business model and with expectations?

$250k is quite a large sum of money for many open source businesses. Perhaps the people concerned think that they're bigger than they really are?

FBSD opportunities (2)

unixisc (2429386) | about 2 years ago | (#42235919)

Technically, FBSD seems to have done a fine job, but they need to be more proactive in proliferating the market. For one, they could partner w/ server manufacturers of various platforms. One that comes straight to mind is HP w/ the Itanium, and here, FBSD's only competition would be Debian and HP/UX. Given all the OSs that have abandoned the platform, this is one golden opportunity for FBSD. Others would be to get into the AVL of major server manufacturers, be it HP, Dell, IBM and so on.

The other thing FBSD can do is try selling itself against Linux. Here, they can adapt a 2 pronged strategy - offer FBSD to any server vendor considering Linux as a server, and offer other alternatives, based on the target applications. If it requires good SMP support or a special file system, consider DragonFly BSD. If it's for routers and firewalls, promote pFsense or m0n0wall. If it's for desktop or laptop use, promote PC-BSD. If it is for embedded applications, consider Minix, or maybe one of the other BSDs. The main marketing strategies should focus on all technical advantages of FBSD and FBSD based distros over Linux based distros. Things like backwards compatibility, stable APIs and ABIs, and so on. Use the licensing advantage only as icing on the cake. While some Linux shops may be dug in, others may be more open to such alternatives.

One thing I wonder - if FBSD, heaven forbid, goes under, what would be the effect on all the other projects - pFsense, m0n0wall, PC-BSD, et al? Will they automatically fold, or will they just be forks from 9.1? I do think a less onerous alternative to GPL is needed, which is why I'd hate to see BSD go under.

Accepting Donations: They're doing it wrong (5, Informative)

Zenin (266666) | about 2 years ago | (#42235925)

http://www.freebsd.org/donations/ [freebsd.org]

Great start! The home page has a Donate link at the top, it takes you to a clear, simple URL.

Then it all falls apart...

95% of the page is about everything other then cash donations. The simple PayPal Donate button? No where to be found. The Network For Good Donate link? Again, AWOL. In fact there is only one small paragraph buried 2/3rds of the way down the page about cash donations...and it just tells you to visit the FreeBSD Foundation page. Even worse, it doesn't link you to the Foundation's Donation page...it links you to the home page where you again, need to dig down and find the real donations page.

Stick the PayPal Donate box (found here [freebsdfoundation.org] ) on the top of the main FreeBSD.org page and I guarantee they'll easily quadruple their donations without doing anything else whatsoever.

I love, love, LOVE FreeBSD, but yah...they've never been particularly good at tooting their own horn. :-/

not that great for home servers anymore (1)

illaqueate (416118) | about 2 years ago | (#42236063)

I've been using FreeBSD on my home servers since 2.1 until recently when I tried Ubuntu on the new server I was building. It's just drastically better at initial configuration. Most of the servers I would want to use are either installed by default or are very easy to install or configure with little intervention. There are too many hoops to jump through on FreeBSD.

Re:not that great for home servers anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236129)

I have had pretty much this same reaction. Both Linux and FreeBSD are rock solid and great to work with. The big difference is with Ubuntu everything works out of the box and it supports a wider range of hardware. With FreeBSD you have to manually set up everything, including compiling your AMP server from scratch (if you want PHP support). FreeBSD really needs to smooth out the initial configuration process and improve their hardware support before I'd go back to them.

Re:not that great for home servers anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236299)

I'm doing that exact thing this very second -- installing FreeBSD as a home server.

Of course I'm actually using PC-BSD, where a lot of things are pre-setup. I've heard that PC-BSD is to FreeBSD as Ubuntu is to Debian.

Not relevant? You wish (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236087)

Netscalers load balance the highest traffic sites you care about and Netflix's new CDN is FreeBSD based.

At this rate more data goes through FreeBSD than Linux

Misleading Story (5, Informative)

Zamphatta (1760346) | about 2 years ago | (#42236117)

A quick Google reveals that FreeBSD's "Year-End Fundraising Campaign" was only recently announced, on December 5th [twitter.com] . So, naturally, they won't be all that close to their goal by December 9th.

$5/$10 minimum donation?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236147)

I don't use FreeBSD, but I clicked through to donate $2 anyway. The minimum donation amount is $10 through DonateNow or $5 through PayPal.

THERE IS YOUR FIRST PROBLEM

Re:$5/$10 minimum donation?? (2)

ArcadeNut (85398) | about 2 years ago | (#42236291)

Every time you make a donation via credit card or PayPal the organization gets dinged with fees. Typically it's a percentage and a per transaction fee. So with such a small donation, the fees might wind up costing them too much for the size of the donation.

Netcraft confirms it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236217)

FreeBSD is dying.

Managing Expectations (1)

srobert (4099) | about 2 years ago | (#42236355)

Apparently the FreeBSD developers have seldom met their own schedule estimates. They don't really think it's important to do so. They estimate October, by December if you ask them when it will be released, they answer, "when it's ready". Their setting of fund raising goals may be similar to their scheduling. They're not good at managing expectations. I don't think FreeBSD will be going away any time soon. How many Linux distributions have failed to meet their fund raising goals from time to time and yet are still very active?

FUD (1)

laffer1 (701823) | about 2 years ago | (#42236421)

FreeBSD tends to do a funding push for short iterations. I don't think this one has been going long. I've only seen posts on it recently. Often, they get many donations from a few select companies that use it. For example, ixsystems, cisco, and juniper.

As someone that runs a very small project, I think they're lucky to have the funding support that they get. Several of the regulars have gotten day jobs or contract work out of their involvement too. I think FreeBSD is a great example of a successful open source project.

I'm running MidnightBSD on about $300 of advertising revenue this year. That doesn't even cover hardware and internet connectivity costs for the year.

The real problem is many folks don't donate to open source projects. I've donated to OpenSSH via OpenBSD in the past as I use it all the time. If everyone donated even a few dollars to their favorite projects, it would make a huge difference. The reality is that large projects can afford to have a few folks full time on the project, but we need money and developers to succeed. The money covers all the downloads, advertising and infrastructure necessary to compete with commercial solutions. Imagine if Linux never would have had the support of Redhat, IBM, or Novell. Imagine if Mozilla wouldn't have had the AOL and Google handouts. Critical mass takes a push and a good product.

Still relevant (1)

gallondr00nk (868673) | about 2 years ago | (#42236775)

I split my Unix derivative loyalties between Arch and FreeBSD, usually with the lNeverputt runs smoother on it than it did on my Arch install.

atter for servers on really old hardware. Recently, I've found Arch upgrading has become more and more of a pain in the ass, especially on rigs with ATI cards. I carried on with it, but the recent removal of the awesome little installation program (I'm lazy when it comes to installers) made me think twice about switching.

So I went with FreeBSD on an old ThinkPad A31. It's absolutely solid, and runs linux binaries happily if I need it to (such as Flash). I dare say that it has a slight performance advantage as well.

Hardly dead.

Confirmed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#42236779)

It is now official. Netcraft has confirmed: *BSD is dying

        One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last [samag.com] in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

        You don't need to be the Amazing Kreskin [amazingkreskin.com] to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

        FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

        Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

        OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

        Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

        All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?