Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

cancel ×

370 comments

Did they alreay win? (1, Interesting)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324337)

I though BSD already has beaten Linux to the Desktop Market.
OS X core (darwin) is based off of FreeBSD. Or they are trying to beat linux by doing it the way that linux is trying to win, by focusing on technology that isn't that important to standard desktop users. getting most of the development effort in useless eye-candy and only minimum development in important features for desktop users like easy hardware detection for a wide variety of hardware, Brainless software installation, excellent wireless support...

Re:Did they alreay win? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324360)

No, desktop Linux has been out for much longer. Back when all the mac zealots where still screaming that mac had the better desktop...

Re:Did they alreay win? (5, Interesting)

Bruenor (38111) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324381)

getting most of the development effort in useless eye-candy and only minimum development in important features for desktop users like easy hardware detection for a wide variety of hardware, Brainless software installation, excellent wireless support

I don't know what Linux distributions you've been using recently but I have recently installed Fedora Core 5 on my laptop and my experience was the opposite: that they must have been primarily focused on important features for desktop users. FC5 supported suspend and resuming my laptop, where FC4 didn't. FC5 supported my Centrino wireless with autodetection and configuration for both open access and WEP and WPA PSK protected networks right from the GNOME Desktop. FC5 automatically detected my USB-attached smart UPS on my desktop at work and can report the remaining run-time. It was the least-hassle desktop Linux install I've done yet.

As far as software installation, I don't use it but you can go to Applications->Add/Remove software and graphically browse thousands of software packages that are a click and a download away from being installed.

Re:Did they alreay win? (4, Insightful)

i_should_be_working (720372) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324392)

I don't think FreeBSD devs care who's using OSX. They are not the same even if they do use similar kernels.

Can you point out the study or survey which shows that most Linux devs spend their time on useless eye-candy? Because I don't think that is the case.

Re:Did they alreay win? (3, Insightful)

gsnedders (928327) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324405)

They aren't using similar kernels: Darwin uses XNU, a hybrid kernel. Many of the things running on higher levels are shared by both, though.

Re:Did they alreay win? (3, Insightful)

afd8856 (700296) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324396)

If by beating Linux to the market you understand having the code taken by a company, and not seeing anything really valuable back in return, then yeah, you can praise OSX as much as you want.

Re:Did they alreay win? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324438)

Linux will always be ahead on cutting edge hardware because of the nature of the licences.

BSD gets a driver, linux will have in after a quick port.
Linux gets a driver, BSD has to wait and re-impliment.

The desktop is far more than Gnome, digital TV cards and all sorts of things will mean linux will always be ahead until drivers for multiple platforms becomes a standard practice of hardware manufacturers.

Re:Did they alreay win? (4, Insightful)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324618)

Linux will always be ahead on cutting edge hardware because of the nature of the licences.

History shows that the 'always' part in there is seriously wrong..

BSD gets a driver, linux will have in after a quick port.
Linux gets a driver, BSD has to wait and re-impliment.


That is how it seems to a person who has absolutely no idea about kernels and drivers and the different BSD distributions.

First, there are quite a few BSD variations all with their own set of rules for integrating drivers, where some see no problem in using gpl code, others see no problem in using closed source drivers in cases, and yet others swear that everything must be free and open.

Second, differences between a BSD style kernel and the linux kernel are substantial enough that a 'quick port' is seldom an option for technical reasons alone.

Re:Did they alreay win? (1)

asuffield (111848) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324691)

If by beating Linux to the market you understand having the code taken by a company, and not seeing anything really valuable back in return, then yeah, you can praise OSX as much as you want.

Don't forget Windows. There's freebsd code in that too.

Re:Did they alreay win? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324425)

for the love of mike, when are people going to be able to tell the difference between "based on the kernel" and based on an OS. please. stop. it's so embarassing.

Re:Did they alreay win? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324460)

No matter what they say, OSX ain't UNIX.

eyecandy is bad? (-1, Troll)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324489)

getting most of the development effort in useless eye-candy

Mac os x is the best desktop operative system in the world. It's also the one who has more eyecandy than any other operative system. You don't like those "useless" drop shadows and transparencies? Well, here comes a newflash for you: Max os x added them first than anyone else.

Re:eyecandy is bad? (0, Flamebait)

muuh-gnu (894733) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324522)

OK, so I have to be the one to dissent to the usual mindless Apfel followers wet dreams:

> Mac os x is the best desktop operative system in the world.

No, Maccie, OS X actually isn't the best desktop operating system in the world.

> It's also the one who has more eyecandy than any other operative system.

And again, Maccie, it isn't even the one with the most eye candy, regardless of what your Apfel prospectuses tell you.

> You don't like those "useless" drop shadows and transparencies? Well, here comes a newflash for you: Max os x added them first than anyone else.

Apfel has indeed often be the first one to add useless stuff to their desktops, just for you fanboys to have something to orgasm on regularly.

Re:Did they alreay win? (5, Informative)

Bastian (66383) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324512)

Ack. When is this rumor going to die?

OS X, back when it was called NEXTSTEP, forked off of BSD 8 years before FreeBSD did, even before 4.4lite came on the scene. You can trace its lineage yourself, if you'd like. [levenez.com] Since then, there's been a lot of code borrowing but everyone borrows from FreeBSD and FreeBSD is far from the only OS whose code Darwin has borrowed. Using just that to say that Darwin is based on FreeBSD would make little more sense than using the same fact to claim that GNU/Linux and Windows XP are based on FreeBSD.

But as to your point about BSD in general beating Linux to the desktop with OS X, yeah, you're right. I think Apple showed how it really needs to be done, too. In my experience with trying to teach people to use Linux, the thing that consistently hurts Linux on the desktop is what I'd call its unixyness - stuff like complicated directory hierarchies based on abbreviated names only serves to intimidate the non-geek; even if you tell them they don't need to care about anything outside their home directory, they still know it's there. A lot of Linux's celebrated choices are bad; too. The moment a user ever has to care about QT vs GTK+ and figure out why they are behaving a bit differently, or what the heck CUPS is, or any of that, Linux starts to feel like a border town on the edge of the Wild.

But that's what I like about it. (1)

AltGrendel (175092) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324675)

The "wild west" feel to working with Linux. In fact, Linux is getting too mainstream; I'm going to switch to OpenBSD.

Re:Did they alreay win? (4, Informative)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324680)

OS X, back when it was called NEXTSTEP, forked off of BSD 8 years before FreeBSD did, even before 4.4lite came on the scene. You can trace its lineage yourself, if you'd like. Since then, there's been a lot of code borrowing but everyone borrows from FreeBSD and FreeBSD is far from the only OS whose code Darwin has borrowed. Using just that to say that Darwin is based on FreeBSD would make little more sense than using the same fact to claim that GNU/Linux and Windows XP are based on FreeBSD.

Referenced from the site you mention yourself is the BSD family tree [tribug.org] .

If you had bothered to look at it, you'd have noticed that:

Darwin is based on Rhapsody, NetBSD 1.4 and FreeBSD 3.2
OS X 10.2 imported code from FreeBSD 4.4
OS X 10.3 imported code from FreeBSD 5.1

If you had ever bothered to use a FreeBSD 5.x machine for a while, and used a machine with OS X for a while from the shell, you'd have noticed how the userland is virtually identical, to a level way beyond how some linux distributions are similar..

Where OS X really did not derive from FreeBSD at all is at the kernel level and of course the gui.

Re:Did they alreay win? (0)

mickwd (196449) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324810)

"...even if you tell them they don't need to care about anything outside their home directory, they still know it's there..."

Because we all know any OS which stored documents somewhere like C:\Documents and Settings\MyUserID\My Documents could never become popular on the desktop.

"The moment a user ever has to care about QT vs GTK+ and figure out why they are behaving a bit differently..."

What about all the programs on Windows that behave differently, or use different toolkits ? Yes, you were talking about MacOS X, but there's no denying that Windows is "popular" on the desktop. And presumably when people first start using a Mac, they manage to overcome the way it behaves a bit differently to the PC they used before.

Linux may not be there yet - but personally I think most of what is missing is an easy-to-use, comprehensive, integrated Control Panel equivalent.

Re:Did they alreay win? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324882)

Linux may not be there yet - but personally I think most of what is missing is an easy-to-use, comprehensive, integrated Control Panel equivalent.

This would be rather difficult to produce, since it would require cooperation between a lot of different projects. I think the KDE control center comes close in terms of controlling KDE and some hardware, and typical things that the control panel should do (audio, screen resolution, window settings...).

Re:Did they alreay win? (3, Insightful)

IamTheRealMike (537420) | more than 7 years ago | (#15325030)

The moment a user ever has to care about QT vs GTK+ and figure out why they are behaving a bit differently

They don't behave differently. At least, the differences are no worse than on the Mac or Windows where apps frequently reinvent the standard toolkit (*cough*Aperture).

or what the heck CUPS is

The only time a Linux user would have to care about this is if their printer isn't supported. And most are (albiet with varying degrees of driver quality).

Re:Did they alreay win? (1)

caseih (160668) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324615)

Not as such, no. OS X is not really based on FreeBSD per se. The Xnu kernel has a BSD layer that implements some of the FreeBSD kernel api (using modified FreeBSD kernel code), and indeed much of the OS X system depends on the BSD layer. But to say that OS X is based on FreeBSD and is a BSD derivative is just not accurate.

They are competing AGAIN? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324338)

Wow, did they compete and lose already since the last time I read this on slashdot (like a day ago)?

What about KDE? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324342)

Anyway only with Gnome they have no chance. Where is KDE?

Re:What about KDE? (4, Informative)

Carewolf (581105) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324399)

In ports. KDE have been tightly integrated with FreeBSD for years.

GNOME's dead end! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324413)

Of course it is :) otherwise they have nothing desktop once they realize how miserable GNOME sucks :) It's actually a good idea to help them port GNOME, so even FreeBSD people know how much it sucks.

Re:What about KDE? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324677)

Several KDE developers actually use FreeBSD. Years ago I gave Gnome a try and found out that Nautilus made it nearly impossible to run remote X Gnome sessions, so I started using KDE. When I bought my Athlon64 box I gave Gnome another chance, and even on that hardware it felt slower than KDE. Maybe when they replace that POS Nautilus thing with something that actually works I'll try Gnome again.

didnt they have a completely goal? (5, Interesting)

Foktip (736679) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324346)

Wasnt the goal of BSD to be secure and reliable, like debian, only moreso? How come now they're "competing with desktop Linux" ?

Re:didnt they have a completely goal? (5, Insightful)

debilo (612116) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324368)

I couldn't find a single example of Scott's "vow to compete" with Linux in the article. All he did was express his hopes of feature parity within a year or so. The "vow to compete" is a useless and sensationalist addition by the author, so let's keep it civil and avoid flame wars.

didnt they have a completely goal?-Flake n' bake. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324401)

"The "vow to compete" is a useless and sensationalist addition by the author, so let's keep it civil and avoid flame wars."

You're new here, aren't you?

Re:didnt they have a completely goal?-Flake n' bak (1)

JFitzsimmons (764599) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324575)

Well, this *IS* bsd.slashdot.org after all. It isn't that hard to imagine a place on slashdot where people are actually civil and mature. For the most part, the comments on this article don't seem to be too bad. Although, I am browsing at threshold 1...

Re:didnt they have a completely goal?-Flake n' bak (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15325008)

"Well, this *IS* bsd.slashdot.org after all. It isn't that hard to imagine a place on slashdot where people are actually civil and mature."

So you're insinuating that BSD people are "civil and mature" and others aren't? That's real mature of you.

Re:didnt they have a completely goal? (1)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324507)

The "vow to compete" is a useless and sensationalist addition by the author

Specially considering that what really matters for desktop is gnome, kde,x.org...not the kernel. The kernel is involved in things hardware support, device and power management (suspend) etc, but what really matters is gnome and kde, nothing else. Gnome is not more usable under freebsd than in linux, neither the reverse.

Re:didnt they have a completely goal? (4, Informative)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324948)

Specially considering that what really matters for desktop is gnome, kde,x.org...not the kernel.

X and a desktop environment matter the most for sure.. but I think you are quite seriously underestimating the role of a kernel in this..

The kernel is involved in things hardware support, device and power management (suspend) etc, but what really matters is gnome and kde, nothing else. Gnome is not more usable under freebsd than in linux, neither the reverse.

You see.. audio/video support sortof matters for desktop use.. so does plug and play hardware support (just plugin that camera and it works..), which are indeed hardware related but specifically, usb, drm/dri and sound support are extremely important for a desktop.

Then, the scheduler can make quite a difference (optimized for throiughput versus responsiveness for example makes a big difference in how 'snappy' your desktop feels)

Then, if you open a folder in say the kde or gnome file/directory browsers, there are 3 things you desktop can do:
1. not notice changes to the directory untill you manually refresh the view
2. poll the filesystem for changes and display them once they got noticed
3. ask the kernel to send a notification when a file changes

1. is no longer an acceptable option nowadays
2. becomes very expensive when you have a lot of files in said directory, and it is always 'too late'
3. requires kernel support (it is supported in slightly different ways in Linux and FreeBSD now) but is low overhead and virtually inmediate.

As you can see, the kernel does in fact play an important role in simple things like browsing a directory already...

So, yes, it does definitely matter for both gnome and kde what kernel they are running on. A year ago the difference between Linux and FreeBSD was substantial, esp. with regards to the scheduler and support for things like fam (without having to poll for changes).. nowadays the difference is far less big.

Re:didnt they have a completely goal? (1, Troll)

kfg (145172) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324684)

The "vow to compete" is a useless and sensationalist addition by the author, so let's keep it civil and avoid flame wars.

Dude, did you take a wrong turn at Albuquerque or something and think you ended up someplace else?

The is The Internet.

Hassan, Chop!

Hassan Chop! Yo, I can't stop
Givin you that off the wall troll slop
Hassan Chop! Yo, I can't stop
This the type of shit that you pump on your address block

Off top, I came to blow the whole spot
Solid as a rock, my whole style is unorthodox
Astronomically flamebait, to a state
Where I create posters rate, snatch ya karma like the dirty mate

KFG

Re:didnt they have a completely goal? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324372)

You say that as if the goals are mutually exclusive.

I've been using FreeBSD on the desktop and in my servers for years and it works fine for me. YMMV, and that's ok too.

Re:didnt they have a completely goal? (2, Informative)

ctr2sprt (574731) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324412)

Wasnt the goal of BSD to be secure and reliable, like debian, only moreso?
There is no "goal of BSD." There are at least four major open source BSD-derived OSes and they all have different goals. Of course every operating system tries to be secure and reliable - even Windows - but you're probably thinking of OpenBSD, where they are willing to sacrifice just about anything for the sake of security.

FreeBSD and DragonflyBSD, to name two, have always had user-friendliness as a major goal (among many others).

Re:didnt they have a completely goal? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324429)

They aren't competing with Desktop Linux... it's PR fluff. FreeBSD is now five years behind Linux, and falling back further still.

This isn't about the FreeBSD base system. (4, Informative)

cperciva (102828) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324354)

To head off some confusion: This isn't about the FreeBSD base system; it's about third party code (like GNOME and KDE) in the FreeBSD ports tree. The FreeBSD base system already has feature parity with Linux (ok, there are a few things Linux has which we don't, but there are also things we have and Linux doesn't) -- the problem now is to get groups like GNOME and KDE to use the features we're making available to them.

This isn't about the FreeBSD base system-seamless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324375)

"the problem now is to get groups like GNOME and KDE to use the features we're making available to them."

Exactly. When is KDE/Gnome going to use the features of SELinux? Metadata? ACLs?

Re:This isn't about the FreeBSD base system. (1)

JPriest (547211) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324445)

If the desktop you seek then a graphical installer begin thy path.

Re:This isn't about the FreeBSD base system. (1)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324980)

If the desktop you seek then a graphical installer begin thy path.

Supposedly you install once (most people neer install, they hire someone to do it for them or buyt their computer preinstalled).

Supposedly, those who are interested in installing something else then the preinstalled stuff on their machine have a slight clue about what they are doing.

If you combine those 2 things, the conclusion must be that while a graphhical installer is definitely nice to have, it is by for not as important as you make it.

Re:This isn't about the FreeBSD base system. (5, Insightful)

JanneM (7445) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324446)

the problem now is to get groups like GNOME and KDE to use the features we're making available to them.

The obvious problem for large projects like GNOME is of course that they need to make a good experience on a pretty wide variety of platforms. To use any platform-specific feature it will need to be either emulated, replicated, worked around or otherwise made available on all platforms; or it could only go in as an optional extra that nothing else is actually depending on. So, making advanced FS logging capabilities a cornerstone of the desktop, for example, would be out since far from all platforms will have the requisite framework. "You can only run desktop X if you also use filesystem Y" is likely to go over like a lead balloon.

Fortunately, good ideas in the OS space tends to be picked up by everybody sooner or later. Over time there just aren't that many good ideas that will not be available everywhere as time goes on.

Re:This isn't about the FreeBSD base system. (1)

Shortgeek (971350) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324952)

"You can only run desktop X if you also use filesystem Y" is likely to go over like a lead balloon.

Sorry if this is trolling, or I'm misunderstanding something, but I believe that you can only use Windows XP if you use filesystem NTFS, and I don't think that went over too badly.

Re:This isn't about the FreeBSD base system. (1)

SillyNickName4me (760022) | more than 7 years ago | (#15325002)

The obvious problem for large projects like GNOME is of course that they need to make a good experience on a pretty wide variety of platforms. To use any platform-specific feature it will need to be either emulated, replicated, worked around or otherwise made available on all platforms; or it could only go in as an optional extra that nothing else is actually depending on. So, making advanced FS logging capabilities a cornerstone of the desktop, for example, would be out since far from all platforms will have the requisite framework. "You can only run desktop X if you also use filesystem Y" is likely to go over like a lead balloon.

The complaint is that the gnome (and kde) team does implement platform specific things, specifically, Linux specific things. In many cases there would be workarounds or ways to support them in a less platform specific way, but that is not being used..

A very nice example in kde is the way ksysguard obtains information about running processes...

Why would you actually look at the OS provided info for entries in /proc... you 'know' the pid is at a specific line in Linux, so just grab it there..

Re:This isn't about the FreeBSD base system. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324540)

I used freebsd for a while, but went back to gentoo, as freebsd doesn't support v4l, which means not tvtime, and xawtv isn't good enough.

If freebsd had v4l support, i would probably still be using it now. (i'm on gentoo at the moment)

Bzzzttt! They Fail It. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324362)

They are fighting to integrate Gnome but, again, failing to identify their markets desires. Most people prefer KDE! The market wants KDE but the developers keep pushing Gnome on them. Then they wonder why people don't use their distro.

I share your view (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324389)

You've got a point. I for myself been struggling with GNOME for a while now and it clearly doesn't get my work done. Nothing really works and finally I decided to switch over to KDE and found myself confortable with a working desktop.

How On Earth Is This Offtopic?? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324398)

He is exactly right! Consistently, users choose KDE but, just as consistently, distro producers are shunning KDE for Gnome in contrast to their user's wishes. Look at Red Hat, SuSE, Ubuntu, and now FreeBSD. They all struggle to integrate and develop an inferior desktop environment that the vast majority of the users don't want to use. The people want KDE so, why not give it to them?

Or is it simply that KDE doesn't require any additional development in order to integrate with FreeBSD?

Re:How On Earth Is This Offtopic?? (4, Informative)

cos(x) (677938) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324503)

There are separate teams working on KDE and GNOME integration. It just so happens that the interview was conducted with a GNOME on FreeBSD developer, so the focus was on GNOME. Be assured that FreeBSD's KDE integration is very good and will be even further improved on in the future. DesktopBSD, for example, features KDE as the default desktop.

Also, KDE is officially a cross-platform environment, with KDE4 being developed not only on Linux and FreeBSD but also on MS Windows. I don't know what the officiall position is for GNOME, but from what I hear they are a pretty Linux-centric project.

Re:How On Earth Is This Offtopic?? (1)

stinerman (812158) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324807)

Seeing as GNOME is developed by the FSF and is part of GNU, you'd expect them not to care much about porting to other OSes. Stallman has said again and again that freedom is more important than popularity. He could probably care less if GNOME or any GNU program will run on anything other than GNU, be that GNU/Linux, GNU/kFreeBSD, or even GNU/Hurd.

Re:How On Earth Is This Offtopic?? (3, Insightful)

houseofzeus (836938) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324548)

He is exactly right! Consistently, users choose KDE...

I would love to see that backed up with some actual facts? I'd say the users are pretty evenly divided (this is definitely what I see at work).

Re:How On Earth Is This Offtopic?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324700)

We at our company have 13 persons using linux. 11 of them use KDE, 1 Blackbox and 1 Windowmaker guy.

Re:How On Earth Is This Offtopic?? (1)

digitalhermit (113459) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324823)

I use many of the Gnome wallpapers on my KDE desktop.

heretics!! (-1, Troll)

wardk (3037) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324374)

goodness, the Da Vinci Code is not as heretical to the catholic church as telling a linux fanbase that BSD kicks ass on their deity

difference being there is documented proof for the latter....

asbestos suit on. flame away kiddies

FreeBSD is fine for little web servers (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324377)

or other light-weight front end servers, MTAs, DNS, etc. for small businesses and hobby users.
Until FreeBSD supports Oracle and IBM s/390 it can't be considered a competitor to more full-featured enterprise OS like Solaris, HPUX, and Linux.

Compete for Market Share? (5, Funny)

denissmith (31123) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324385)

Compete with DESKTOP Linux? Shouldn't they aim a little higher, compete with OS/2???

How to Beat Linux (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324407)

I'll give you an example of just how poor their hardware config tools are. My system is 5 years old, includes a Sound Blaster PCI16 audio card, NIC uses the Tulip Driver, Via Chipset and under freebsd it's impossible to configure the sound card withouth rebuilding a kernel? and I've never succeeded in even getting started on rebuilding the kernel. Another issue is why in hell don't they use DMA access to drives as yet? All 4 drives in my system all offer DMA access and they can't bother to run hdparm automagically and enable that feature? That's idiotic as it provides such a performance boost to the system.

What the need to do is enable audio support in the kernel and use Alsa instead of reinventing the wheel as they're trying to do and yes I do know that the entire project derived from a server environment where sound wasn't a concern. At least they did the right thing and used Xfree so the video support is available to those who need it.

Now if they'd spend some time developing the needed hardware configuration tools and ease the audio/video/misc hardware issue by taking it out of their kernel and using existing modular projects "Use the Modules Luke", maybe they'd finally get somewhere.

Re:How to Beat Linux (0, Flamebait)

antik2001 (535940) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324668)

Install PC-BSD and you don't have to worry about your bullshit claims about "superior" hdparm and even worse ALSA (Advanced Linux Sound A**hole). I even didn't bother to explain how wrong you are... RTFM.

Windows eats Linux and poops FreeBSD (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324409)

Windows eats Linux and poops FreeBSD

Re:Windows eats Linux and poops FreeBSD (5, Funny)

debilo (612116) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324443)

Windows eats Linux and poops FreeBSD

I am confused - are you trying to depict Windows as a gourmet or rather as an entity with a magic colon?

Re:Windows eats Linux and poops FreeBSD (2, Funny)

Sponge Bath (413667) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324611)

I am confused...

He's just tired of the car/OS analogy and
decided to introduce the bodily function/OS analogy.

Brilliant! I can't believe he posted AC!

What? (1)

aenima-aenema (974577) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324428)

To bet for Desktop? Is it that it is going to stop betting in Servers' topics? I do not understand in order that it wants to bet for Desktop if his clients are for the most part for Servers' use, is it what already it does not see future only to bet for clients dedicated to Servers?

Unix is capable for desktop marketshare? (-1, Troll)

freehunter (937092) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324431)

HA! HA! ahahahahahahaha hahahaha hahaha ha ha hooooooo That's a good one! Lemme tell you the one about the preist and te boyscout leader now. See, these two were in the woods...

Re:Unix is capable for desktop marketshare? (1)

rg3 (858575) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324481)

I don't understand what you mean. MacOSX is a *nix system that works very nicely as a desktop. I don't think the *nix systems in general have something that prevents them from being successful at the desktop market. Unless you mean that, for market matters, nobody will ever be able to have a significant marketshare and compete with Windows. That may or may not be true, but sugesting *nix systems are technologically incapable of working as desktop computers is... bullshit?

Re:Unix is capable for desktop marketshare? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324515)

I don't understand what you mean. MacOSX is a *nix system that works very nicely as a desktop.

OS X is not a *nix system in any meaningful sense of the word.

Re:Unix is capable for desktop marketshare? (1)

WilliamSChips (793741) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324629)

My guess is that you define "*nix" as "incapable for the desktop" and ergo fall into the No True Scotsman fallacy.

Forgive Me I May Know Not What I Do (4, Interesting)

Quirk (36086) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324436)

I loath the worn, tired :), computer/automobile anology as much as anyone (I'm guessing it got its start from the Information Highway idea), but I'm going to try wring a few last drops from it.

In 1908, the Ford company released the Ford Model T [wikipedia.org] . The first Model Ts were built at the Piquette Manufacturing Plant. The company moved production to the much larger Highland Park Plant to keep up with the demand for the Model T, and by 1913 had developed all of the basic techniques of the assembly line and mass production. Ford introduced the world's first moving assembly line that year, which reduced chassis assembly time from 12½ hours in October to 2 hours, 40 minutes. However these innovations were not popular and turnover of workers was very high. Turnover meant delays and extra costs of training, and use of slow workers. In January 1914 solved the problem by doubling pay to $5 a day, cutting shifts from nine hours to an eight hour day, and instituting hiring practices that identified the best workers. Productivity soared and employee turnover plunged, as the cost per vehicle plummeted. Ford cut prices again and again and invented the system of franchised dealers who were loyal to his brand name.

By the end of 1913, Ford was producing 50% of all cars in the United States, and by 1918 half of all cars in the country were Model T's. Henry Ford is reported to have said that "any customer can have a car painted any color that he wants so long as it is black." This was because black paint was quickest to dry; earlier models had been available in a variety of colors. But most were black."

What the Model T was to the automobile DOS/Windows is to computer software. People faced with new technology that manages to takeoff tend to choice a brand that they gravitate toward in order to provide them with a base from which a general learning curve can be traced. As with the Model T, once a general concensus is arrived at as to what the new technology can do for the masses then competing models come into play and bells and whistles are taken in hand after the basics have been learnt. The computer industry has achieved a saturation level and the basics have been put in place. Now there is a chance for more competition. It's likely that Linux on the desktop is coming soon.

That freeBSD has chosen to announce its competition with Linux is more supplemental support to show that the basics of the desktop have been put in place. Competition between Linux and freeBSD is great and will foster competition between F/OSS alternatives that will soon provide greater incentive for the general computer population to move from Windows to alternatives.

I suspect the initial gauge of this movement will be a greater market share taken by Apple.

Just my loose change

Re:Forgive Me I May Know Not What I Do (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324931)

That freeBSD has chosen to announce its competition with Linux is more supplemental support

That the poster has chosen to parrot the "competition" word, without RTFA first, is more supplemental (hey, ain't that redundant?) evidence of h/is/er idiocy. A few FreeBSD PORTS developers announced that they would work with the GNOME project to make sure gnome developers don't make Linux-specific code. I.e., the article is more about gnome than FreeBSD. The article never said there was a "competition", but the Linux fanboy poster took that to be the case. Why? Because Linux fanboys take their cue only from their secret lover: Microsoft. That's right. The linux model of development is MICROSOFT. How else can one explain the morphing of "code portability" into fears of a "competition".

Read the article, poster. Fuckin read it. Do you see the word "competition" in any form? No, it's not there. You IMAGINED it was there, based on your Redmond-inspired paranoid view of software development. According to your pea-brain, anyone who wants a user-app to run on their OS is in competition with your precious penguin droppings.

Re:Forgive Me I May Know Not What I Do (1)

Quirk (36086) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324959)

"That the poster has chosen to parrot the "competition" word, without RTFA first..."

RTFA
Acronym for "Read The Fucking Article" [urbandictionary.com]

Article?

There's articles on /.?

When did that happen? Is this part of the new look?

Uhuh (0)

ThoreauHD (213527) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324441)

If you're relying on Gnome to form hardware 'parity' with Linux, you'll be waiting a long time. Pop FreeBSD into a machine and have it autodetect everything on any modern 32-bit PC- then you will reach 'parity'. Gnome.. why?

Google trends confirms (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324462)

BSD is dying [google.com]

FreeBSD VS's GNU/Linux on the desktop (3, Interesting)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324478)

from personal experience i have to say i am biased towards GNU/Linux with Slackware being my favorite, i recently tryed both DesktopBSD & PC-BSD on my first primary partition, they were both decent KDE desktops and i was familier with CUPS so setting up my printer was not a problem, but with GNU/Linux when i tried ubuntu breezy it made setting up a GNU/Linux desktop a total "no brainer" (including printer, scanner & digital camera) that should help non-techies setup a GNU/Linux desktop a lot easier, the two BSD desktop flavors (DesktopBSD & PC-BSD) stand a good chance to give the GNU/Linux desktop camp some competition which is a good thing :)

Re:FreeBSD VS's GNU/Linux on the desktop (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324578)

from personal experience i have to say i am biased towards GNU/Linux with Slackware being my favorite, i recently tryed both DesktopBSD & PC-BSD on my first primary partition, they were both decent KDE desktops and i was familier with CUPS so setting up my printer was not a problem, but with GNU/Linux when i tried ubuntu breezy it made setting up a GNU/Linux desktop a total "no brainer" (including printer, scanner & digital camera) that should help non-techies setup a GNU/Linux desktop a lot easier, the two BSD desktop flavors (DesktopBSD & PC-BSD) stand a good chance to give the GNU/Linux desktop camp some competition which is a good thing :)


Punctuation is a good thing too. Take a breath, man. Sheesh! ;)

Anyway, as a fellow Slacker I agree with you about competition. FreeBSD is definitely a worthy competitor and we'll all be better off for it.

"GNOME's hardware abstraction layer"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324501)

Why does a desktop environment need a hardware abstraction layer?

not until they get rid of that magic number shit (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324533)

This will never happen until BSD gets rid of that "magic number" shit from the freaking dark ages!

Solaris fixed this in 2.5, that was over 10 years ago, where the fuck is BSD in this?

Can't BSD get a freaking clue and fix the disk partitioning nightmare? I mean it doesn't take 10 freaking years
to add this technology that is now ancient, does it?

And what about standard device numbering? I mean, my god, it isn't that freaking hard is it?
Hell Solaris had this back before 2.4, even 2.2 or 2.1 or earlier!

and linux has had it since day one! I mean WTF!!!???

is it really that hard for you morons to make it "eth0, eth1, eth2, hda, hdb, sda, sdb, etc etc" ???

so what - now the truth about BSD is trolling?? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324683)

everything in that post is the truth.
BSD still uses "magic numbers"
it still has the 10 year old partition handler.
and it still has non-standard device numbering.

So now the TRUTH is considered trolling?? WTF?

FreeBSD already is a great Desktop OS (1)

dysfunct (940221) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324549)

About two years ago being a Gentoo user I tried FreeBSD and never went back. Everything just works very nicely. It worked right "out of the box" but unlike many Linux distributions that are considered easy to use it doesn't abstract away too many things from the user so I can still implement my own changes without any hassle.

Installing GNOME or KDE is already possible and is actually quite trivial. What TFA is really talking about is implementing all the extra stuff that makes life a little easier like hald that's required for GNOME or KDE to autodetect hardware. Things like automatic detection of USB devices already exist and work great in FreeBSD, it's just not compatible to what KDE and GNOME require.

This is a good thing. (2, Insightful)

Jacek Poplawski (223457) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324559)

I am not a BSD user and I am not going to even test it, but I think this is a good thing - bigger free desktop market will lead to better Free Software, more people will report bugs and more people will discuss new features.

Developer Laments: What Killed FreeBSD (0, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324573)

The End of FreeBSD

[ed. note: in this following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

Discussion

I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

Shouts

To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It's when you get distracted by the politickers that they sideline you. The tireless work that you perform keeping the system clean and building is what provides the platform for the obsessives and the prima donnas to have their moments in the sun. In the end, we need you all; in order to go forwards we must first avoid going backwards.

To the paranoid conspiracy theorists - yes, I work for Apple too. No, my resignation wasn't on Steve's direct orders, or in any way related to work I'm doing, may do, may not do, or indeed what was in the tea I had at lunchtime today. It's about real problems that the project faces, real problems that the project has brought upon itself. You can't escape them by inventing excuses about outside influence, the problem stems from within.

To the politically obsessed - give it a break, if you can. No, the project isn't a lemonade stand anymore, but it's not a world-spanning corporate juggernaut either and some of the more grandiose visions going around are in need of a solid dose of reality. Keep it simple, stupid.

To the grandstanders, the prima donnas, and anyone that thinks that they can hold the project to ransom for their own agenda - give it a break, if you can. When the current core were elected, we took a conscious stand against vigorous sanctions, and some of you have exploited that. A new core is going to have to decide whether to repeat this mistake or get tough. I hope they learn from our errors.

Future

I started work on FreeBSD because it was fun. If I'm going to continue, it has to be fun again. There are things I still feel obligated to do, and with any luck I'll find the time to meet those obligations.

However I don't feel an obligation to get involved in the political mess the project is in right now. I tried, I burnt out. I don't feel that my efforts were worthwhile. So I won't be standing for election, I won't be shouting from the sidelines, and I probably won't vote in the next round of ballots.

You could say I'm packing up my toys. I'm not going home just yet, but I'm not going to play unless you can work out how to make the project somewhere fun to be again.

= Mike

--

To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. -- Theodore Roosevelt

Re:Developer Laments: What Killed FreeBSD (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324897)

Ye Flippin' Gods.

Not that one again. Dude, 2002 called, they want their post [freebsd.org] back.

That's just BULLSHIT! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324595)

Show me ALSA equivalent in FreeBSD! FreeBSD can be used for low quality, high latency consumer level audio - nothing more. Thanks to ALSA Linux can be used in recording studios nowadays. ALSA supports high end audio cards like RME Hammerfall and M-Audio delta series. FreeBSD is lightyears behind when it comes to high quality audio.

That's it... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324626)

Scott Long is going to f*cking kill Linux!!!

Yay! No more pinko software! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324651)

The BSD license beats the tar out of the communist GPL.

That poster I have of Richard Stallman puffing on a hand-rolled Havana with Che Guevara kinda tells it all...

You youngsters all go shoo now. Git! Git!

I wonder if the NRA uses BSD? Hmmmmm...

I don't understand! (5, Funny)

Godji (957148) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324660)

Can we please have a car analogy?

Re:I don't understand! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324785)

Oh that's easy. If you imagine that Linux is like a brown Humvee with 600 horsepower and
is driven by a soccer mom, then FreeBSD is like a Volvo that has good protection from side
intrusions in accidents. The FreeBSD driver (Scott Long) would like this car to be more
like an 18 wheeler because that has more torque but is not just bolted on like a bolt on
supercharger on the other one.

Does that help clear everything up?

Major Problems from a FreeBSD User (4, Interesting)

Breaker_1 (688170) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324673)

I use FreeBSD on a daily basis, I have FreeBSD servers, a FreeBSD development machine, and a FreeBSD daily use desktop (irc, email, web browsing, im, etc.) As it stands now yes, FreeBSD has both the newest versions of KDE and Gnome, and as far as I know the newest version of all the bigger window managers. However, as it stands now FreeBSD is not really a viable desktop in the same way that Linux is. This is because of the two major 3rd party softwares, neither of which are open source. Flash on FreeBSD is rather a joke, which is not to say that the people who work on the flash ports aren't doing well, but going to any flash site is a gamble. Pandora and Google Video, both sites that I go to regularly, lock up Firefox completely. And then there's Java. Java is marked restricted in the ports because of licensing issues, is non-redistributable (hope I spelled that right). Java is a real pain in the arse on FreeBSD. In my experience, the chances of a successful build are about 50/50 at best. You have to download several larger files and move them into the distfiles directory, start the build and cross your fingers and wait.. many hours.. There are other problems as well, for FreeBSD as a desktop os like Linux, but these are the major two... everybody expects to be able to browse the web on a desktop OS with little to no trouble. And as it stands now FreeBSD is unable to deliver an easy to use, out-of-the-box solution for desktop use. I hope this doesn't start a flame war, just adding my two cents.

Re:Major Problems from a FreeBSD User (4, Informative)

Teckla (630646) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324727)

And then there's Java. Java is marked restricted in the ports because of licensing issues, is non-redistributable (hope I spelled that right). Java is a real pain in the arse on FreeBSD.

From the FreeBSD web site:

The FreeBSD Foundation has negotiated a license with Sun Microsystems to distribute FreeBSD binaries for the Java Runtime Environment (JRE(TM)) and Java Development Kit (JDK(TM)).

Enjoy!

Re:Major Problems from a FreeBSD User (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324757)

I use flash with linux-opera and it works fine. Java has been dead on the desktop for almost 8 years, so who cares.

my checklist... (1)

Churla (936633) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324711)

I use FreeBSD on all my server machines I run for personal use. Love it, wouldn't consider changing.

If it wants to run at the desktop market my suggestions would be:

a) Graphical setup
b) Better hardware autodetection (both during install and post install)
c) A GUI by default that is tight and looks good.
d) A more easy to use graphical interface into the ports system.

THat's a start, get those and we'll talk desktop.

Flamebait me if you will, but here I go... (1)

WgT2 (591074) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324744)

One problem that FreeBSD developers have faced is that GNOME developers tend to be focused on Linux rather than considering other desktop operating systems.

That being said, my advice is to take this as a hint and forego dealing with Gnome. Besides, (here's the flamebait) Gnome pails in comparison in usability to KDE; never have I hated a software application as much as I have hated Windows, until I have had to use Evolution for my email client. It just does some of the stupidest things I can imagine.

Sub-Preface: Gnome, and its applications, have one saving grace: features not found it KDE applications; like proxy use for IM in GAIM and an Exchange plugin in Evolution. Come oooon KDE, get those features soon!

That said, if I choose a signiture from the drop down menu (which I have told the preferences multiple times to use a default sig but it doesn't care what I think - which is either a Fedora Core 4, Evolution, or Gnome problem), and if for some reason I wish to edit that signiture and happen to need to delete a letter, everything after the cursor gets deleted also. Ctrl-z fixes what delete should naturally do, but NOOOO Gnome can't make an application that works as expected.

GAIM is another nightmare. One of the worst things about is that if I 'signoff', which means from all IM channels, and 'signon' again it will only signon one channel and not all of them. What in the world kind of functionality is that? It sucks and I have come to believe Torvalds' "Use KDE" [osnews.com] rant; it is sadly accurate.

Re:Flamebait me if you will, but here I go... (1)

sparcdr (974679) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324838)

Actually GNOME has generally the same features as KDE, but it lacks the graphical widgets and controls to customize certain aspects. Most of GNOME customization is done through the included preferences, although gnome's gconf-2 editor will let you do the rest. While it is true that KDE is probably more advanced, GNOME does have the extra polish. KDE can also be made to have this so called polish too, but we're talking about desktop use here. People want a desktop out of the box with a decent looking desktop, well organized, and not extreme on ram usage. GNOME is chiefly based on C, although it does have Python and Perl integration also. I really would love the Portland project to work out between the two projects. As far as commercial applications, Alsa needs to always be a plugin or second bet, because if you drop OSS support, you are dropping compatibility for Solaris and *BSD. I can run Skype under FreeBSD with linux-compat-8 fine, but if Alsa is the only option, FreeBSD kernel developers will have to pump out a kernel module to translate the calls. Right now it's essentially native. There are a few things missing from BSD on the desktop which I outlined in BSDtalk #43 with Will Backman. Visit http://bsdtalk.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com] and subscribe if you want to keep in touch with BSD developers, users, and enthusiasts. Mac OS X will always have the edge over Linux and BSD because of the patenting issues, so it's very moot comparing them. Of course XGL and GNOME are far more flexiable then Aqua to customize, but there is definitely a limit which should be imposed to reduce confusion, when it comes to knobs and gizmos.

Re:Flamebait me if you will, but here I go... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324939)

Actually, all you just said is what GNOME is not!.

> Actually GNOME has generally the same features as KDE

Wrong. GNOME doesn't even provide 1/5 of the functionality and features offered by the KDE desktop environment - and the things GNOME offers are badly implemented and don't work reliable enough.

> but we're talking about desktop use here. People want a desktop out of the box with a
> decent looking desktop, well organized, and not extreme on ram usage.

Exactly, that's why people natively use KDE as their desktop - since everything is tightly and well integrated, well oranized and consumes less ram than GNOME does. They get a desktop that looks awesome and works great.

Re:Flamebait me if you will, but here I go... (1)

Deagol (323173) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324896)

Have you ever tried Kope as a Gaim replacement? It's pretty nice.

Hardware support? (1)

DickBreath (207180) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324826)

Forgive my ignorance of things FreeBSD.

How is the hardware support? Does it support the variety of devices that Linux supports? (honest question)

For a desktop (vs. a server) a wide variety of hardware support is important. Desktop users have a huge variety of hardware.

Whenever I hear talk of any other non-Linux OS, the hardware question is the first one that pops into my mind. Nevermind the micro/monolithic kernel debates, when someone proposes a different OS kernel, my first question is always: Hardware support?

Now just to really wander off topic: maybe something that would be of really long term benefit to FOSS is, not only a driver binary interface standard, but a driver binary interface standard that was designed to be supportable by existing and future OS kernels.

Laptops Laptops Laptops! (2, Interesting)

MisterP (156738) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324829)

One of the big problems with any flavour of Linux that I've used is the laptop support. Even though I've always specifically bought laptops with very good linux compatibility, it's still hit and miss. A large chunk of the computers sold in retail stores now are laptops and they're getting more and more popular as the price of them continues to drop. Suspend and wifi needs to Just Work.

What I would like to see is a small core list of laptop models that are essentially "certified" to work. Pick the most popular lines, get them working 100% then add more and more models without breaking support for the laptops that worked previously. Ubuntu in particular seems to have a shockgun whack-a-mole approach to supporting laptops and it's maddening.

GPL vs. BSD License (2, Funny)

static0verdrive (776495) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324904)

You won't get too far against linux with that license, buddy.

No one wants this (5, Insightful)

dirtyhippie (259852) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324923)

I realize this article is about the ports tree, but FreeBSD's main source *has* been moving at a blistering rate of development the past few years. Recently there was an article about linux 2.6 getting buggier - and unfortunately the same is true of FreeBSD 5.x and 6.x ... Some things to consider:

* 6.x came out shockingly fast after 5.x
* 4.x was orphaned correspondingly quickly (despite being arguably the only stable freebsd branch left)
* vinum (software raid) support, among other things, was broken thanks to the introduction of geom around 5.1, and gvinum is finally beginning to approach stability as of 6.1
* The new scheduler, ULE, was introduced in one 5.x release and then abandoned when it proved to be completely unstable.
* As a reaction, one of the lead developers forked dragonflybsd off of the last truly stable freebsd release, the 4.x branch. Others have just given up.
* Bugfixes are getting left on the floor in favor of adding features ( just look at a relatively old release such as freebsd 5.3's TODO list: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.3R/todo.html [freebsd.org] - note that most of these problems are *still* not fixed in 6.1 )

People choose the BSD's for stability - or at least, they used to. FreeBSD has been going down a features at all cost route in some kind of effort to play catchup with their perceived rival linux for some time. In doing so, it is losing what makes it unique, and it needs to stop, or else people will abandon FreeBSD for other BSDs, linux (which is now more stable IMO), and even mac os.

-DH

Dead man walking! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15324993)

We got a dead man walking here!

Competition is great! (1)

Britz (170620) | more than 7 years ago | (#15324995)

Competition drives innovation. One of the reasons why I think KDE vs. GNOME is a great idea.

On a sidenote, what the end user sees is not Linux, FreeBSD, Ubuntu, Fedora or Windows for that matter. They see Luna, KDE and Gnome.
I heard KDE even runs on Windows. So when I tell someone I can install a new system on their computer I tell them it is either KDE or Gnome.

I must be new here! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15325033)

I, for one, welcome our new GnomeLSD overlords!!!

Not until VMware works on it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#15325041)

Sorry but VMware is my lifeblood. Although I wouldn't mind running FreeBSD, it ain't gonna happen unless all the software I need is available.

The FreeBSD/Linux problem is similar to the Linux/Windows problem. Linux has less stuff available than Windows (but enough for me) and FreeBSD has even less than Linux.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...