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
  #1   (View Single Post)  
Old 9th May 2009
DNAeon DNAeon is offline
Shell Scout
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 138
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Default NOT another Linux vs BSD thread

Hi, guys and girls

I'm NOT going to start a new thread about comparing Linux and BSD as I wrote in the title, but instead I would like to ask you a few questions about your opinion.

/* Just to point out first, I'm a BSD user and I'm proud of it! */

So here are the questions...

1. Why do you think Linux got so much popularity?

And by that I mean thing like that - why do not most of the manufactures/vendors do not provide drivers for their hardware for BSD also, most of them concentrate on Linux (excluding Nvidia for example and ATI which I hope will make us happy with an open source driver soon)

2. Why does not Adobe make our lives a bit easier and give us a native Flash player, instead of running it under Linux emulation?

3. Most of the Linux guys which I had a discussion with haven't even heard of BSD - isn't this a constricted outlook?

4. And why the heck I'm even talking about Linux, when I have a real UNIX?

Cheers,
DNAeon
__________________
"I never think of the future. It comes soon enough." - A.E

Useful links: FreeBSD Handbook | FreeBSD Developer's Handbook | The Porter's Handbook | PF User's Guide | unix-heaven.org
Reply With Quote
  #2   (View Single Post)  
Old 9th May 2009
BSDfan666 BSDfan666 is offline
Real Name: N/A, this is the interweb.
Helpful companion
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 2,223
Thanked 193 Times in 184 Posts
Default

I'll bite..

Answer #1
Part #1: The early legal battle, USL v. BSDi.
Part #2: 386BSD wasn't around when Linus first created Linux, he's openly stated that if it had of been.. Linux wouldn't have existed.

Answer #2:
Part #1: Because Adobe/Macromedia Flash is a useless piece of trash, and they know it.
Part #2: Their internal statistics seem to indicate BSD is used by a small percentage of people.

Answer #3:
Part #1: They are obsessed with GNU, the existence of non-viral free software threatens their religious belief structure.
Part #2: Rock dwellers, they choose not to explore other alternative Unix-like operating systems.

Answer #4:
Part #1: You are questioning the decision to use BSD, the dark side is luring you.
Part #2: Secretly you're a GNU spy trying to steal our Megabytes.

Hope that helps.
Reply With Quote
  #3   (View Single Post)  
Old 9th May 2009
Oliver_H's Avatar
Oliver_H Oliver_H is offline
Real Name: Oliver Herold
UNIX lover
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 429
Thanked 26 Times in 22 Posts
Default

>1. Why do you think Linux got so much popularity?

Well because of legal issues as mentioned above, but partly also due less hype than in the Linux community. But do you know the NSA, DARPA, Nokia, Apple, Cisco, Juniper, ISC, Yahoo et. al.? They're all using *BSD. Furthermore Firefox 3 uses jemalloc from FreeBSD, OpenSSH from OpenBSD is used in *BSD and Linux too, Linux kernel uses many drivers from *BSD, superpages etc., Google Android uses libc from NetBSD/OpenBSD and many parts of the userland etc. pp. As I said less hype :-)

>2. Why does not Adobe make our lives a bit easier and give us a native Flash player, instead of running it under Linux emulation?

Well, ask them. Sun pays for Flash in Solaris and Flash for Linux is good for the public relation of Adobe ('we do open source too'). Linux has got less to none relevance on the desktop, *BSD has got even a fraction of this relevance only. So in the end we're talking about hype.

>3. Most of the Linux guys which I had a discussion with haven't even heard of BSD - isn't this a constricted outlook?

The less hype, the less fellows, the more quality :-)


>386BSD wasn't around when Linus first created Linux

386BSD was utter crap. Therefore we've got FreeBSD and NetBSD :-)
__________________
use UNIX or die :-)
Reply With Quote
  #4   (View Single Post)  
Old 9th May 2009
DNAeon DNAeon is offline
Shell Scout
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 138
Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BSDfan666
Answer #4:
Part #1: You are questioning the decision to use BSD, the dark side is luring you.
Part #2: Secretly you're a GNU spy trying to steal our Megabytes.
Ah, no way! I'm not a spy!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver_H
Well because of legal issues as mentioned above, but partly also due less hype than in the Linux community. But do you know the NSA, DARPA, Nokia, Apple, Cisco, Juniper, ISC, Yahoo et. al.? They're all using *BSD. Furthermore Firefox 3 uses jemalloc from FreeBSD, OpenSSH from OpenBSD is used in *BSD and Linux too, Linux kernel uses many drivers from *BSD, superpages etc., Google Android uses libc from NetBSD/OpenBSD and many parts of the userland etc. pp. As I said less hype :-)
Didn't know that Google Android was using libc from NetBSD/OpenBSD - haven't search for any info about that though. That's something new I've learned

Thanks for the answers!
__________________
"I never think of the future. It comes soon enough." - A.E

Useful links: FreeBSD Handbook | FreeBSD Developer's Handbook | The Porter's Handbook | PF User's Guide | unix-heaven.org
Reply With Quote
  #5   (View Single Post)  
Old 9th May 2009
jggimi's Avatar
jggimi jggimi is offline
More noise than signal
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 3,685
Thanked 214 Times in 189 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BSDfan666 View Post
I'll bite..
You've made my day.
Reply With Quote
  #6   (View Single Post)  
Old 9th May 2009
Oliver_H's Avatar
Oliver_H Oliver_H is offline
Real Name: Oliver Herold
UNIX lover
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 429
Thanked 26 Times in 22 Posts
Default

For the Android stuff: http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blo...eway_to_a.html
__________________
use UNIX or die :-)
Reply With Quote
  #7   (View Single Post)  
Old 9th May 2009
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 DNAeon
> Hi, guys and girls
girls?

1. Linux has gathered momentum over the years but it took a tremendous about of hype (lot of half truths, brainwashing and a lot of BS) to get this far.

2. Adobe doesn't care about the BSD's because they only account for a miniscule percentage (< 1%) of the desktop market. It's not because Adobe is bad, it's probably because this is not something that is high on their list of priorities and they have a business to run.

3. http://www.freebsd.org/advocacy/

4. Oh please, let's not start with the "real" Unix arguments.
Reply With Quote
  #8   (View Single Post)  
Old 9th May 2009
Oliver_H's Avatar
Oliver_H Oliver_H is offline
Real Name: Oliver Herold
UNIX lover
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 429
Thanked 26 Times in 22 Posts
Default

>Oh please, let's not start with the "real" Unix arguments.

Well, why not.

http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/openso...k/kirkmck.html

It's the heritage we're talking about.
__________________
use UNIX or die :-)
Reply With Quote
  #9   (View Single Post)  
Old 9th May 2009
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 Oliver_H View Post
>It's the heritage we're talking about.
Yeah, but in this day and age the Unix 'trademark' doesn't mean much at all. Unix is still important, the trademark isn't.
Even the commercial Unix vendors don't flaunt their Unix badge anymore.
Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2009
Oliver_H's Avatar
Oliver_H Oliver_H is offline
Real Name: Oliver Herold
UNIX lover
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 429
Thanked 26 Times in 22 Posts
Default

Okay but one thing is a silly trademark and another one is the UNIX history. Btw. the single UNIX specification counts even today, have a look e.g. at several governments.
__________________
use UNIX or die :-)
Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2009
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

1.

Because it was the "geeky cool" thing back then; you could hex edit your disk into booting Linux, and build your own custom unix system on cheapo hardware, what could be cooler then that?

Because of the infiltration of geekdom and subsequent infiltration of a portion enterprise systems, for most people its "Windows, Linux, and baby Mac", unless your idea of an OS means Windows 95/98/ME/2000/XP/Vista/7

2.

Who will foot the bill? And if no one, what coders on the Flash product care to port it in their free time (this is IMHO)

3.

To many GNU/Linux users that I have met, vi is vim, Linux is the OS, Linux is the Unix, always was and always will be. To any competent Linux user I've met, they generally know that there is a difference between Linux and Unix, and usually know of a few BSDs.


4.

I assume curiosity.

History aside, FreeBSD is not a *real* UNIX, but is probably more fun then some real UNIX systems ;-)
__________________
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 9th May 2009
ocicat ocicat is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 2,883
Thanked 190 Times in 160 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ephemera View Post
Linux has gathered momentum over the years but it took a tremendous about of hype (lot of half truths, brainwashing and a lot of BS) to get this far.
It is also quite possible that that heated Tanenbaum-Torvalds debate on the value of microkernels picqued the curiosity of many.
Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2009
Oliver_H's Avatar
Oliver_H Oliver_H is offline
Real Name: Oliver Herold
UNIX lover
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 429
Thanked 26 Times in 22 Posts
Default

Compared to today's 'fat' Linux kernel, a microkernel would be indeed of great value ;-)
__________________
use UNIX or die :-)
Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2009
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 ocicat View Post
It is also quite possible that that heated Tanenbaum-Torvalds debate on the value of microkernels picqued the curiosity of many.
I wasn't introduced to computer's at the time but I did read it a few years later.
Yeah, that surely must have added fuel to the hype machinery around Linux.

My experience of Linux is from 1999-00. The Linux noise in the media was deafening. I don't how the Linux personalities made the sort of claims about Linux they did at the time with a straight face.

There was anti-BSD propganda going on too. Apparently, the BSD license wasn't free like the GPL, and the fbsd devel model (core team et al) wasn't really open/democratic like Linux...
Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2009
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 ephemera View Post
Apparently, the BSD license wasn't free like the GPL, and the fbsd devel model (core team et al) wasn't really open/democratic like Linux...
That's one reason (well, two reasons) that I went with BSD. It was also hard-wired into my fingers, but that is of no consequence.
Reply With Quote
Old 9th May 2009
Oko's Avatar
Oko Oko is offline
Fsck Surgeon
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kosovo, Serbia
Posts: 768
Thanked 36 Times in 32 Posts
Default

I thought that original post was a troll and I still think this is a troll. I am surprised how many serious people posted their answers. Since we are already trolling I will post couple observations.

An average Linux user is a desktop user who is dual booting Windows and Ubuntu. He/she is primarily GUI user mostly unaware of Operating System. He/she knows about Unix as a barrel of donkeys. If, accidentally, such a Linux user stables across BSD he/she will give us lots of FUD. The FUD usually goes something like this:"Flash doesn't work, Java plugins are difficult to install, Skype doesn't work with video or not at all, and HAL either doesn't exit or doesn't work out of box". Then they will continue about lack of drivers for BSDs.
It is interesting to note that all above technologies are proprietary which seems odd having in mind the vision of founding fathers of GNU movement.
Or is it really odd that BSD sucks because couple companies see no viable reason to provide their proprietary products for BSD. No, not at all since GNU founding fathers are full of shit as their followers. The image they are trying to project to their flock has little to do with reality.

For example: http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Stallman/index.shtml

Why does Linux seem to have more drivers than BSDs? Because of their willingness to
sign non disclosure agreements with hardware manufactures unlike most of BSD people minus some minority of FreeBSD gang. Linux people are trying to lock the hardware for any other open source project much like their alleged nemesis M$.
In reality Linux owns its very existence to M$ who ported Unix to crappy i386 machines. It owns its existence to the IBM and HP which needed it to combat M$
on the commodity server market.

Linux is neither free nor non-proprietary product for the most part. Presently it is mostly product at least kernel of one proxy company called RedHat (read IBM and HP instead) which has different revenue model than M$. Even RedHat(Fedora) openly admins that Linux desktop has no future. Canonical (buntu) and Novel(SuSE) are here to prove RedHat wrong. I think they will be filling for bankruptcy soon. All other Linux distros are jokes. How many kernel commits have been done by Slackware developers last year? Compare that to RedHat.

Story of GNU is even more comic. Emacs runs fine on M$ as well as GCC. As a matter or fact GCC is presently completely controlled by corporate interests. If that is not the case I am sure that SGI enthusiasts will be able to compile more than 2000-3000
which currently can compile on SGI.

Why BSD is not popular? Because for the most part with exception of Apple and FreeBSD (up to some point) doesn't care for GUI users. Those users will not benefit from BSD nor BSD will benefit from them.
Because BSD used to be a joke. Serious people in early and mid nineties were running Digital Unix, Solaris, and Irix. The only advantage BSD offered to real Unix users was its ability to run crappy Wintel hardware (that is why FreeBSD which essentially runs only on Wintel hardware is the most popular flavor of BSD).
Most present day BSD users are old Unix users who have commodity hardware. Oh wait a minute. Real hardware doesn't exist any more unless we count there three
years old SUN's blades which are as fast as P4 and cost $1000.


OpenBSD is a niche product never meant to be widely used. NetBSD is almost gone
since non-Wintel hardware is almost gone (Those who run Amiga, Atari, SGI, or even
SUN please raise your hands). Sparc 64 port of NetBSD is buggy as Hell doesn't support any hardware beyond 1998. PPC port of NetBSD is on life support. NetBSD port of SGI supports two essentially Wintel machines (O2 and Indigo). What else are there? Nothing. Everything is just Wintel junk. That is way NetBSD is only relevant for embedded devices (which is HUGE market). DragonFly actually is cool project.
It did manage the develop Hammer. Couple clever guys managed to beat 100 of RedHat engineers who couldn't even properly copy the Journaling File Systems developed by proprietary Unix-es 20 years ago. In particular comparison of Ext3 and
ZFS is laughable. Oh wait a minute Linux has a new Journal File System in the pipe line and is already better than ZFS. Sure. That is why SGI who donated that journal file system is out of business.


Ok. I am going to stop trolling now. I feel better. Count until ten Oko.

Last edited by Oko; 10th May 2009 at 01:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
Old 10th May 2009
Oliver_H's Avatar
Oliver_H Oliver_H is offline
Real Name: Oliver Herold
UNIX lover
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 429
Thanked 26 Times in 22 Posts
Default

>NetBSD is almost gone

Au contraire, after seeing NetBSD 5.0 I see indeed a very strong and healthy BSD operating system.

>DragonFly actually is cool project.

Sure, but most of the time his work doesn't gain momentum (apart from his great dice compiler back on the Amiga). ZFS is to some degree funky too, as is brtfs, XFS, Hammer. But the major difference to UFS is: UFS is _stable_ as in _rock-stable_, it's not funky, cool or groovy ;-)

>Oh wait a minute Linux has a new Journal File System in the pipe line and is already better than ZFS. Sure. That is why SGI who donated that journal file system is out of business.

Wait, you surely mean brtfs - and this very fs is from Oracle not SGI. SGI donated XFS.
__________________
use UNIX or die :-)
Reply With Quote
Old 10th May 2009
anomie's Avatar
anomie anomie is offline
Local
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 446
Thanked 69 Times in 46 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oliver_H
Wait, you surely mean brtfs - and this very fs is from Oracle not SGI. SGI donated XFS.
I think he meant GFS.
__________________
Kill your t.v.
Reply With Quote
Old 11th May 2009
peenworm's Avatar
peenworm peenworm is offline
Port Guard
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 12
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
3. Most of the Linux guys which I had a discussion with haven't even heard of BSD - isn't this a constricted outlook?
This to me is incredible. I've worked for many years in BSD-only shops but I would think anybody involved with x86 unices would have at least heard of BSD.
Reply With Quote
Old 12th May 2009
indienick indienick is offline
Lisp Junkie
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: London, ON, Canada
Posts: 27
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peenworm View Post
This to me is incredible. I've worked for many years in BSD-only shops but I would think anybody involved with x86 unices would have at least heard of BSD.
I don't find it shocking in the least; having been doing the "Linux thing" from a young age (ca. 12 years' old) I never heard about BSDs until I was taking a look-see at distrowatch.com a year-or-so ago. I have often seen BSDs played out as, "It's like Linux but not [as good]..."

IMHO, BSDs do lag behind Linux a little bit, but only in terms of popularity and, thus, drivers. As far as stability goes, BSDs win; at a recent job interview, they asked me if I knew Linux and what I thought of it; I explained that I am seceding from the Linux world and moving into BSDs, and while there's nothing wrong with Linux, the "religion" behind Linux and the GPL aren't to my liking. On the same note as the "stability" comment; I find it terribly easy to corrupt a Linux system - you just have to poke it a few times...and they are slowly getting to the Windows-level of automation (packages and such)...and it's really beginning to show signs of suffering. The last few times I have had to re-install Linux, was because an "apt-get upgrade" or "slackpkg upgrade-all" went awry and bricked my system.
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
NetBSD laptop thread Mr-Biscuit Guides 1 10th June 2009 05:51 AM
linux compat and linux-only drivers fbsduser FreeBSD General 9 22nd January 2009 05:42 PM
The big TeX and (g)troff thread JMJ_coder General software and network 23 10th November 2008 01:19 PM
BSD Girls/Woman Thread worldofopensource Off-Topic 15 11th June 2008 05:25 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:30 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