DaemonForums  

Go Back   DaemonForums > FreeBSD > FreeBSD General

FreeBSD General Other questions regarding FreeBSD which do not fit in any of the categories below.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 18th August 2008
thevirtuesofxen thevirtuesofxen is offline
New User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 6
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Very important: - Lack of native adobe flash player
Has FreeBSD ever tried to emulate Solaris? From my experience, Flash 9 on Solaris runs A LOT better, and isn't broken like Linux's. Now that OpenSolaris is out, it might be a lot easier.
Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2008
harisman's Avatar
harisman harisman is offline
Fdisk Soldier
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hellas (Greece)
Posts: 66
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carpetsmoker View Post
FreeBSD is a server operating system, which just happens to run on the destop.
If you want a desktop OS with the features you listed, then choose Windows, or OSX, Or Linux, or whatever.
FreeBSD is a server operating system, none can disagree with this...
Linux currently is very usable as a desktop operating system and shares with FreeBSD the same X windows environment, the same window managers, the most of the available opensource programs, etc.. - so with just a few additions FreeBSD can do the same good job as Linux does.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carpetsmoker View Post
The FreeBSD foundation takes care of the legal and financial side of FreeBSD, it doesn't do any development.
Exactly this is the key role... I don't except the foundation to develop something but to make a financial agreement with adobe so as the FreeBSD to have the needed player. Browsing the internent nowdays *requires* the flash player, because flash-equiped sites are vast majority of all the sites !!

We are talking about just a f** player after all !!! How much money are needed for this??... We don't need the whole adobe flash suite to be ported to FreeBSD, for God's shake!!

Last edited by harisman; 18th August 2008 at 07:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2008
JMJ_coder JMJ_coder is offline
VPN Cryptographer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 464
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BSDfan666 View Post
I was going to make a similar reply until I realized he used "X" to represent a substitution not X as in the X Windowing system.
Maybe I should have used _blank_ instead of X.
__________________
And the WORD was made flesh, and dwelt among us. (John 1:14)
Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2008
JMJ_coder JMJ_coder is offline
VPN Cryptographer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 464
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by harisman View Post
FreeBSD is a server operating system, none can disagree with this...
But, aren't all the *BSDs (and even all *nix) server operating systems?
__________________
And the WORD was made flesh, and dwelt among us. (John 1:14)
Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2008
ninjatux's Avatar
ninjatux ninjatux is offline
Real Name: Baqir Majlisi
Spam Deminer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 293
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JMJ_coder View Post
But, aren't all the *BSDs (and even all *nix) server operating systems?
I don't think so. The BSDs and GNU/Linux distributions are multipurpose operating systems that have predominantly been used on servers in the past because they were originally intended as F/OSS replacements for proprietary Unixes, which were also predominantly used on servers. As time passed, the userbase of at least the BSDs and Linux diversified because of how far-reaching F/OSS is. Inter-Unix portability is outstanding, so I think any Unix can be used as a fulfilling desktop operating system. However, some are better than others, depending on what the user(s) expect out of their system.
__________________
"UNIX is basically a simple operating system, but you have to be a genius to understand the simplicity."
MacBook Pro (Darwin 9), iMac (Darwin 9), iPod Touch (Darwin 9), Dell Optiplex GX620 (FreeBSD 7.1-STABLE)
Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2008
drhowarddrfine drhowarddrfine is offline
VPN Cryptographer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 358
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by harisman View Post
FreeBSD is a server operating system, none can disagree with this...
Linux currently is very usable as a desktop operating system and shares with FreeBSD the same X windows environment, the same window managers, the most of the available opensource programs, etc.. - so with just a few additions FreeBSD can do the same good job as Linux does.
So if FreeBSD shares virtually everything with Linux, why is FreeBSD a server OS only? Granted, I believe the developers focus on server issues and networking but, besides that, what stops anyone from saying FreeBSD is a general purpose OS as good as any of them? (Despite the fact that some apps, like flash, aren't available. Lack of an app does not mean the OS is not capable.)
Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2008
JMJ_coder JMJ_coder is offline
VPN Cryptographer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 464
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ninjatux View Post
I don't think so. The BSDs and GNU/Linux distributions are multipurpose operating systems that have predominantly been used on servers in the past because they were originally intended as F/OSS replacements for proprietary Unixes, which were also predominantly used on servers. As time passed, the userbase of at least the BSDs and Linux diversified because of how far-reaching F/OSS is. Inter-Unix portability is outstanding, so I think any Unix can be used as a fulfilling desktop operating system. However, some are better than others, depending on what the user(s) expect out of their system.
Well then is there some kind of objective criteria that distinguishes between a server, desktop, and general OS? Or is just a subjective title based on what a current operator(s) is using it for?
__________________
And the WORD was made flesh, and dwelt among us. (John 1:14)
Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2008
TerryP's Avatar
TerryP TerryP is offline
Arp Constable
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USofA
Posts: 1,547
Thanked 112 Times in 104 Posts
Default

Now, I really don't mean to be rude (especially since I don't have time to read every post twice across both pages).


But I think everyone should forget the distinction between "Server OS" and "Desktop OS", it doesn't matter.


Server:

Must be stable
Must be easy to work with
Must be secure
Must run owners services

Desktop

Must be stable
Must be easy to work with
Hopefully considers security
Must run owners applications


FreeBSD is a unix like operating system, so it is portable, multi-tasking and multi-user. One could argue that the level of multi-user features present in unix like systems is overkill for a "desktop" --> Coming from a Win 98/XP background I find it superior to comparable features in the leading desktop OS. FreeBSD furfills the needs of *both* server and desktop well, so does GNU/Linux, so does OSX, so does Windows Vista. The proper question to pose, is "can I use X system as Y?".


I need decent clients for smtp, imap, pop, http/https, and ftp (e.g. a MUA, WWW Browser, and 'ftp'). Plus vim, instant messengering for the major networks, pdf/ps and image viewers, a type setting system that can yield PDF/PS documents (e.g. *tex /or groff), and playback support for many audio/video formats. With strict requirements for decent multi-tasking capability, >=20GB of file system, and obeying my concept that a "reboot means something huge" and not a fresh coat of paint.


Thus I can use just about any operating system that has the ability to display images. Some people have different needs, who knows, maybe someone *must* have some advanced program for chemical analysis or something; that means they need a system that meets there needs and supports that software. Some peoples needs for a desktop OS might still fit on a PDP-1, others might be beyond mans current reach....


But it's not the operating system that makes a server or a desktop, it's the purpose it serves. What system is used, depends on need and choice. If you can do the same things on OSX as you can on Vista, choose the one you like... There isn't *that* much difference, as far as regular users are concerned.




(Point of reference/hypocritic note: I do know a few people using windows server installs as a 'desktop os', for one reason or another.... and personally find it strange)
__________________
My Journal

Thou shalt check the array bounds of all strings (indeed, all arrays), for surely where thou typest ``foo'' someone someday shall type ``supercalifragilisticexpialidocious''.
Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2008
hunteronline hunteronline is offline
Fdisk Soldier
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 52
Thanked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Default

Quote:
(Point of reference/hypocritic note: I do know a few people using windows server installs as a 'desktop os', for one reason or another.... and personally find it strange)
They didn't pay for the OS .....

.... back to regular programming ....
Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2008
DrJ DrJ is offline
ISO Quartermaster
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Gold Country, CA
Posts: 506
Thanked 39 Times in 39 Posts
Default

I personally find the XP/Vista limitation to a single user to be absolutely maddening. Presumably the server version does not suffer from this limitation.
Reply With Quote
Old 18th August 2008
BlueJayofEvil BlueJayofEvil is offline
Real Name: Aaron
New User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Minnesota, USA
Posts: 8
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

I use FreeBSD as a desktop, and so far it does what I need. I keep an XP drive in my system mainly for a few games, but as things like Wine/Crossover/Cedega mature more and more, the need for XP is becoming less. Especially since each install of XP I've done becomes unpredictable (some set-ups are fine, while others crash on trivial common things.)
The things I look for in a desktop set-up are (in no particular order):
-Ability to surf the Internet
-IM client
-Multimedia player
-Af ew good games
-Customizablilty (wallpaper, sounds, icons, etc)
-(Optional) Eye-candy
-Fast performance

Flash is optional for me, but preferred (newgrounds.com & youtube junkie)

And I have also heard of a few people using Windows Server as a desktop. Someone a month or two ago posted a comment on Distrowatch.com saying the server 2008 was "the best desktop OS I've ever used." I might check that out in the future...maybe.
Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2008
drhowarddrfine drhowarddrfine is offline
VPN Cryptographer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 358
Thanked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Default

I'm aware of people using Windows server as a desktop, too. Until just a few weeks ago, I had been using fbsd as my desktop for over a year. I'm compiling programs for someone elses linux server right now so switching to Ubuntu was convenient but I do find it inconvenient not being able to play flash on fbsd.nk

I said this elsewhere. If I had some time, I'd port it myself.
Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2008
Carpetsmoker's Avatar
Carpetsmoker Carpetsmoker is offline
Real Name: Martin
Old man from scene 24
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 2,080
Thanked 198 Times in 156 Posts
Default

Well, you can do three things:

o Stop looking and the OS and start looking at the applications, the OS isn't *that* important, applications are, and many applications for UNIX just plain suck.

o Stop complaining about FreeBSD that ``must'' do X, or ``should'' implement feature Y and start working on it, either by programming, recruiting, raising funds, whatever ... Just sitting and complaining isn't constructive and a waste of time.

o If you're not prepared to start working on it, then suck it up or use another OS.

There is a point where helpful criticism stops, the flash player issues comes back again and again and again and again, if we were to put all the flash threads on the various forums/lists in one place I fear it would collapse in on itself and start to absorb light.

Quote:
I personally find the XP/Vista limitation to a single user to be absolutely maddening. Presumably the server version does not suffer from this limitation.
You can switch users in XP, I assume Vista has a similar feature ... In addition you also have the RunAs command.
But it's not very good, no, you can't just quickly ``su'' to the Administrator account, which is why I (And almost everyone else) just give their main account Administrator privileges.
__________________
UNIX was not designed to stop you from doing stupid things, because that would also stop you from doing clever things.
Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2008
DrJ DrJ is offline
ISO Quartermaster
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Gold Country, CA
Posts: 506
Thanked 39 Times in 39 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carpetsmoker View Post
the OS isn't *that* important, applications are, and many applications for UNIX just plain suck.
I agree with this 100%, but my complaints about that are well known here.
Quote:
You can switch users in XP, I assume Vista has a similar feature
That's still a single user. What I mean is that you cannot have someone sitting at an XP box doing work, and connect to that box from another computer as a different user (using remote desktop or some such). That is not allowed. Single user only. I presume the server versions are not like that.

On the larger topic of what to do when the OS does not support something what you want, there are also the options of waiting until it is fixed (which does happens -- VMware or VBox will make it one of these days to FreeBSD) or working around it. I have enough computers that I keep some windows boxes running. Then I don't really need a VM, though it would be nice. Flash9/Firefox/Wine also works OK, though it is no replacement for a Linux version and lpw.
Reply With Quote
Old 19th August 2008
ninjatux's Avatar
ninjatux ninjatux is offline
Real Name: Baqir Majlisi
Spam Deminer
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Antarctica
Posts: 293
Thanked 15 Times in 15 Posts
Default

Quote:
Stop looking and the OS and start looking at the applications, the OS isn't *that* important, applications are, and many applications for UNIX just plain suck.
What if the operating system is a resource hog and doesn't perform well, as in the case of Windows? What if it isn't stable? I think the OS is very important, but just an OS is no good because you need applications, and I agree with that.

That brings me to the next ponit. Whether an application sucks or not depends on the user because each user's required feature set will be different from another's.
__________________
"UNIX is basically a simple operating system, but you have to be a genius to understand the simplicity."
MacBook Pro (Darwin 9), iMac (Darwin 9), iPod Touch (Darwin 9), Dell Optiplex GX620 (FreeBSD 7.1-STABLE)
Reply With Quote
Old 20th August 2008
chavez243 chavez243 is offline
Fdisk Soldier
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Leamington, ON
Posts: 50
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

FreeBSD is an operating system - period.

It happens to excel at being a server platform.

With a little due diligence on the user's part - it makes a fairly decent desktop platform, esp. for developers, sysadmins and unix fanboys.

You want a great BSD desktop - Steve Jobs owns this little company called Apple and had the foresight to move to a BSD-based OS dubbed Darwin, atop which they slapped a pretty darn slick GUI.

Right tool for the right job, I say. If I want to play Bioshock, I boot into XP, if I want to do dev work or do infosec research, I boot to BSD.

Besides, the desktop persona of BSD is in the hands of the folks developing Xorg, Gnome, KDE and all the desktop apps and not necessarily within the control of those at FreeBSD.

My workstation (at work) is a BSD desktop (Xorg/Gnome) but due to the nature of business environments, I also have a notebook running XP Pro since I have to admin servers of all kinds. I think BSD makes for a good desktop platform, but I'm willing to put the work in. A slightly easier route but still unix would be Debian (IMO).
Reply With Quote
Old 20th August 2008
lumiwa lumiwa is offline
Package Pilot
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 145
Thanked 4 Times in 3 Posts
Default

I am not computer educated but I use computers. I started with DOS and it works for me than came OS/2 which was very good OS IMO and BTW I started to use Star Office (now OpenOffice). Than I changed OS/2 with Linux. It was hard to installed this time but I stay with Linux. KDE, I think version one, was good for my desktop computer. But I was scared to install FreeBSD but not so long ago I put FreeBSD beta on my desktop computer and it worked and works very good. What about Flash? I use gnash and it works for me. There are also many free programs for genetics which are very good and at work and at private life I recommended FreeBSD to everyone for the desktop computer.

Mitja
--------
http://starikarp.fotki.com
Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2008
Inty's Avatar
Inty Inty is offline
New User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carpetsmoker View Post
FreeBSD is a server operating system, which just happens to run on the destop.
If you want a desktop OS with the features you listed, then choose Windows, or OSX, Or Linux, or whatever.
I couldn't agree more, FreeBSD's main focus is the server market.
Linux is trying to be a jack of all trades, like windows.
Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2008
ephemera's Avatar
ephemera ephemera is offline
Knuth's homeboy
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 537
Thanked 49 Times in 43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chavez243 View Post
FreeBSD is an operating system - period.

It happens to excel at being a server platform.

With a little due diligence on the user's part - it makes a fairly decent desktop platform, esp. for developers, sysadmins and unix fanboys.
...
Besides, the desktop persona of BSD is in the hands of the folks developing Xorg, Gnome, KDE and all the desktop apps and not necessarily within the control of those at FreeBSD
...
I completely agree with that.
Reply With Quote
Old 22nd August 2008
coppermine's Avatar
coppermine coppermine is offline
Port Guard
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 40
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

These discussions have been seen in bsdforums at least few times. Although the time passes, but some close to heart features as flash, WLAN, USB automounting are still not the shiniest side of FreeBSD.

The people talking that FreeBSD is server OS are right. In my opinion. If you are just willing to learn new things, you will discover that you can avoid significant pain by avoiding either broken hardware or just trying to run everything (!) on one OS or box. For example, I have stopped to try running BSD on my laptop. It is time Consuming! Note the capital letter. Instead, I have found Ubuntu or even Mac OS X better suited for this.

Yes, the FreeBSD hasn't received much attention from software developer side as linux has, but it is rock solid! These are not just loud words. The surveys (I found the Netcraft's) says that most hacks ever done by percent are done on linux-driven boxes! Even the Microsoft is behind. The BSDs are one of the strongest ... however, also they are secure as you make them. The operating system and on the other side - service/daemon/application/(whatever) security are NOT equal!!!
No OS except BSD can accept tremendous loads received on very responsible web servers. Not linux, not IIS ... ))) but BSD!

Yes, you guessed! I am FreeBSD fan... if FreeBSD will keep basic traditions as true UNIX, it will stay my only server OS.

Last edited by coppermine; 22nd August 2008 at 12:43 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Can I start using FreeBSD as desktop machine paragkalra FreeBSD General 4 19th July 2008 05:20 PM
32bit freebsd 7 on 64x2 system for desktop cysquatch FreeBSD General 9 15th July 2008 12:08 PM
FreeBSD KDE/GUI DESKTOP HELP rave_mystery_inc FreeBSD Installation and Upgrading 5 5th July 2008 06:18 AM
Problems with 1000baseTX on Intel Pro 1000 desktop PCI card [FreeBSD 7.0 RELEASE] asmo FreeBSD General 0 28th June 2008 07:12 PM
Can't start KDE desktop in FreeBSD bryancostanich FreeBSD Ports and Packages 9 11th June 2008 10:47 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:58 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content copyright © 2007-2010, the authors
Daemon image copyright ©1988, Marshall Kirk McKusick