If freezing is symptomatic of bad OS performance then I'd say : OpenBSD almost never freezes on this laptop , while I use it at times as a full desktop (gnome/kde) with lost of GUI applications running at the same time .. this was not the case with PcBSD.On a 8 giga flash stick OpenBSD installs & runs well ! when I first tried installing PcBSD on that very stick it installed but hang on boot and never got on to fancy Kde4.
Is this Equation correct?
Security/Reliability + Usability = Good Performance.
Doesn't it lack a human factor : one's ego : me .. me .. me ? What I'd be using/expecting ..
Doesn't it lack a machine factor : the hardware with all its + & - ? AMD 64 intel athlon ppc ..
I used httrack to mirror big edu sites once on Windows : Fiasco , as data size gets bigger & you can't do extra tasks with ease.In OpenBSD : I was on fvwm , httrack xterms filled 3 to 4 screens : that makes : 12 mirroring instances for days .. It never froze.
Good Performance : offering maximum functionality with minimal/zero undesirable consequences.On Compaq Mini CQ10-130SE : Win** overheats machine while boastfully serving you a Gui+IE.This was not the case with NetBSD/OpenBSD : they serve X + full unix functionality that a Unix average user would expect using .. this without smothering the machine.
Quote:
|
FreeBSD developers tend to use Macs/Macbooks for their workplace instead of FreeBSD
|
It's most likely they have to .. (eg. MacOsX's Vmware Fusion is the best emulation product that ever existed .. so they can test & evaluate FreeBSD with more ease while still working on the desktop .. smooth trans between guest & host unfound elsewhere)