FreeBSD Popularity
Brandon Falk
Why is it that FreeBSD is so far behind Linux in popularity? The fact
that lots of companies are not very supportive of FreeBSD (ex. NVIDIA
and ATI 64-bit drivers) is really starting to bother me. I guess I would
like to have a bit of a discussion of what could be improved to increase
the popularity of FreeBSD, as honestly I can do almost everything in
FreeBSD that I can in Linux, so why can't FreeBSD thrive as much as
Linux. Is it that it is harder to install/configure? Any opinions/ideas
on this situation?
-Brandon Falk
Martin Tournoij
> that lots of companies are not very supportive of FreeBSD (ex. NVIDIA
> and ATI 64-bit drivers) is really starting to bother me.
The reason there are no 64bit nVidia drivers is because the FreeBSD kernel is
missing some features that are needed for this. (I believe there are beta
64bit drivers now though?).
In any case, it is hardly fair to blame nvidia.
> I guess I would like to have a bit of a discussion of what could be improved
> to increase the popularity of FreeBSD.
Nothing. FreeBSD has no plans or illusions to take over the world.
> Any opinions/ideas on this situation?
There is no situation.
--
Martin Tournoij
carpet...@rwxrwxrwx.net | (+031) 621 991 576
http://www.carpetsmoker.net | http://www.daemonforums.org
QOTD:
If in doubt, mumble.
Charlie Kester
Other than missing drivers, how has FreeBSD's "lack of popularity"
affected you? You yourself say that you can do almost everything in
FreeBSD that you can in Linux. So where's the rub?
Perhaps it's just the uncertainty that comes over us when our choices
aren't validated by others? If so, get over it. Or take comfort in the
fact that the people on the @freebsd.org mailing lists *have* made the
same choice as you.
The FreeBSD project is alive and well, and doesn't seem to need or want
a mass migration of users from the Linux, Mac or Windows world. Many
BSD'ers think the price that would have to be paid to win those converts
is too high: we don't want BSD to become just like Windows, or the Mac,
or Linux. In fact, some people think we've already gone too far...
Jamie
> that lots of companies are not very supportive of FreeBSD (ex. NVIDIA
> and ATI 64-bit drivers) is really starting to bother me.
o IBM
When IBM first started getting mixed up with Linux, I was concerned,
thinking they'd do to it what they did to OS/2, (it's still a concern
actually) but it seems to have actually done some good for Linux.
Apple kind of screwed the FreeBSD community by taking BSD and
some-how hiding it from their users. You don't exactly see Apple
"bragging" that they use BSD, it's more like their dirty little
secret. (Apple is, IMO, a horrible company to get as far away from
as possible, arrogant, snarky and just plain awful.)
o Dot Com
During the 90's there was much talk about "linux technology" on the
financial news networks by people who didn't understand it.
There are a lot of people who have no idea what UNIX is, or even
what an operating system is, but they've heard about "linux".
Usually, they say "linux is good for servers, windows is good for
desktop" we need this changed to "linux is good for desktop, freebsd
is good for servers".
o RedHat/Debian/Mandrake/...
Linux has more "openings" for 3rd parties to create their own
distros, this means, multiple vendors have reason to promote it.
(Not suggesting anything here..)
o gtar/tar/star/btar/blah
In BSD (DragonflyBSD,FreeBSD,OpenBSD) there is a real attitude
problem, the idea seems to be "GNU sucks and you should use BSD
alternatives". I like the GNU, I don't like having to have 18
versions of "make" around (gmake, make, bmake, smake...) or 20
variants of "tar". Most people don't know or care about such things.
You don't really see GNU-folk bashing BSD, why does BSD have to bash
GNU? Why not say the GNU complements BSD for certain things?
Probably lots of other factors I'm leaving out. (Such as commercial
support by multiple vendors, you can see the word "Linux" on various
product boxes)
> I guess I would
> like to have a bit of a discussion of what could be improved to increase
> the popularity of FreeBSD, as honestly I can do almost everything in
> FreeBSD that I can in Linux, so why can't FreeBSD thrive as much as
> Linux. Is it that it is harder to install/configure? Any opinions/ideas
> on this situation?
I like both platforms.
I'd say bug hosting providers about it, call radio shows, bug vendors
about it. Hosting providers and radio shows in particular. (If you know
someone at IBM... bug them too..) just get the word "FreeBSD" into the
collective.
It would be good to find an "IBM for BSD", but it would appear Oracle
and IBM are the only companies left..
There is one really CRITICAL thing I have to say..
Don't alienate linux users!!!!
FreeBSD isn't trendy enough to "pull an apple", we can't afford to be so
arrogant.
I was on a linux IRC channel the other night, this FreeBSD nut-job
joined and started telling all the linuxer's that "their platform
stinks..." this isn't helping... the right way is to tell them linux is
great for A,B,C but FreeBSD is better for X,Y,Z.
Don't alienate people, no one likes to hear they're stupid. (and many
linuxers do identify strongly with their platform, an attack on linux is
personal)
I see a lot of this going on, from general attitudes to pictures of
penguines being sexually assaulted. This paints FreeBSD into the the
image of a childish, and frankly offensive, gang of creeps no one would
want to be associated with. (the irony being of course, most FreeBSD
folks tend to be a little older, while linux tends to have a lot of
"punks")
Linux and the flyswatter can get away with it because microsoft is soooo
huge and it's not as sexually charged. People don't "identify" with
insects like a butterfly as they might a penguin, frog or other animal,
and anyway, windows users don't usually feel as personally connected to
their OS.
If you were IBM, how would you feel about supporting a platform with
cartoons of its mascott raping a partner? (or even competitor..)
Microsoft (as a server) is the problem, not Linux.
Linux seems to be doing more to take over the windows world, this has
problems (like crappy bloated windows-like software on linux.. that
eventually infiltrates FreeBSD..) but I still think it's good that linux
is doing that. FreeBSD meanwhile, stands at the ready for server stuff.
Tell people how great freebsd is, not how crappy linux is. Remind them
that we're all "unix-like", so you're not loosing anything by selecting
freebsd for server stuff, you can still use linux as a workstation.
Jamie
--
http://www.geniegate.com Custom web programming
Perl * Java * UNIX User Management Solutions
Brett Glass
> In BSD (DragonflyBSD,FreeBSD,OpenBSD) there is a real attitude
> problem, the idea seems to be "GNU sucks and you should use BSD
> alternatives".
The problem is with the licensing. Those of us who are professional
developers and develop commercial software cannot safely inspect
GPLed code for legal reasons. This is why I and many other
developers favor a completely BSD-licensed solution.
> You don't really see GNU-folk bashing BSD,
Actually, you do. And they do something even funnier -- they try to
put their own stamp on Linux. (Just call it "Linux" in front of
Richard Stallman, and you won't hear the end of it. He'll yell,
"It's GNU/Linux. Gnooooooooooooooooo-LINUX!")
Which is doubly ironic because every Linux distribution contains
bunches of code from BSD. ;-)
--Brett Glass
Charlie Kester
>At 11:53 AM 2/28/2010, Jamie wrote:
>
>> In BSD (DragonflyBSD,FreeBSD,OpenBSD) there is a real attitude
>> problem, the idea seems to be "GNU sucks and you should use BSD
>> alternatives".
>
>The problem is with the licensing. Those of us who are professional
>developers and develop commercial software cannot safely inspect
>GPLed code for legal reasons. This is why I and many other developers
>favor a completely BSD-licensed solution.
No, it's more than the GPL licensing, although that's bad enough.
GNU software is often bloated. Way too many commandline switches (using
an overly verbose syntax). Feature creep everywhere, not just on the
commandline.
It runs counter to the basic Unix philosophy of small, cooperating
programs, each doing one thing and doing it well.
If you don't understand that there's an aesthetic aspect to Unix, you'll
miss what a lot of people are complaining about with GNUish stuff.
Brett Glass
>If you don't understand that there's an aesthetic aspect to Unix, you'll
>miss what a lot of people are complaining about with GNUish stuff.
There's that, too. So many longwinded command line options that
they had to start using double dashes. And Linux also tends to
follow System V conventions, some of which were changed from the
BSD ones by AT&T just to make things annoyingly different.
Then again, there never really was a "UNIX style manual." There
probably should have been, so that command line options (among
other things) were more consistent. But as often happens, the
coders were too busy coding to take a step back and consider this.
In any case, I like the fact that I can hop back and forth between
FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, and the command line shell in MacOS
without having to reprogram my fingers.
--Brett Glass
Frank Shute
>
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 12:49:23PM -0600, Brandon Falk wrote:
>
> > Why is it that FreeBSD is so far behind Linux in popularity? The fact
> > that lots of companies are not very supportive of FreeBSD (ex. NVIDIA
> > and ATI 64-bit drivers) is really starting to bother me.
>
> The reason there are no 64bit nVidia drivers is because the FreeBSD kernel is
> missing some features that are needed for this. (I believe there are beta
> 64bit drivers now though?).
> In any case, it is hardly fair to blame nvidia.
I have to leap to nvidia's defense also. They worked hard with the
FreeBSD team to come up with a 64-bit driver which I'm currently
running without problems on AMD64: x11/nvidia-driver
>
> > I guess I would like to have a bit of a discussion of what could be improved
> > to increase the popularity of FreeBSD.
>
> Nothing. FreeBSD has no plans or illusions to take over the world.
Correct. It's minding it's own business
>
> > Any opinions/ideas on this situation?
>
> There is no situation.
I've seen Linux go from quite a nice OS to one that is dominated by a
few individual companies: RH, IBM, Novell.
I don't want that to happen with FreeBSD. If it does; NetBSD here I
come ;)
To be honest, I think the licence puts off most of the commercial
entities. Which is a *good* thing.
Regards,
--
Frank
Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html
Eitan Adler
> � � � �desktop" we need this changed to "linux is good for desktop, freebsd
> � � � �is good for servers".
>
> o gtar/tar/star/btar/blah
>
> � � � �In BSD (DragonflyBSD,FreeBSD,OpenBSD) there is a real attitude
> � � � �problem, the idea seems to be "GNU sucks and you should use BSD
> � � � �alternatives". I like the GNU, I don't like having to have 18
> � � � �versions of "make" around (gmake, make, bmake, smake...) or 20
> � � � �variants of "tar". Most people don't know or care about such things.
I agree. I find it annoying when a program depends on gtar or gmake.
Why can't people just use portable options?
> I like both platforms.
Agreeds
> Tell people how great freebsd is, not how crappy linux is. Remind them
> that we're all "unix-like", so you're not loosing anything by selecting
> freebsd for server stuff, you can still use linux as a workstation.
And you could still use freeBSD a desktop or Linux as a server.
Matthew Seaman
> To be honest, I think the licence puts off most of the commercial
> entities. Which is a *good* thing.
Which is utterly bizarre. The BSD / Apache / MIT/Xorg style license is
considerably less onerous for any business to comply with than the GPL
(especially the most recent versions).
Part of the reason I suspect is perceptual. There's more BSD stuff
around than you might think. The BSD license (at least in the 2- or 3-
clause forms) perhaps makes it too easy for a company to use
BSD-licensed technology in a hidden way. Sure, the copyright of the
original authors will be acknowledged, but in the small print hidden at
the end of the manual, not in some obvious place. The GPL does tend to
cause the license terms to be displayed at the slightest opportunity.
Not that I propose reintroducing the advertising clause -- getting
companies to give greater prominence to their use of BSD technologies
is a social and marketing problem that doesn't need to be solved by some
legal blunt instrument. Then again, the fact that BSDs on the whole
don't go in for aggressive evangelism appeals to me.
It would be interesting to see what the breakdown of different licenses
was for the open source code produced by eg. Google (which most people
would automatically assume is a Linuxista company.) I've a
sneaking suspicion that their default is to use the Apache license,
except where the viral provisions of the GPL prevent that.
Cheers,
Matthew
--
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard, Flat 3
Black Earth Consulting Ramsgate
Kent, CT11 9PW
Free and Open Source Solutions Tel: +44 (0)1843 580647
Roger
I was a Linux (Desktop and Server) user, now I am a FreeBSD user
(Desktop and Server) and I could not be any happier.
I did not install FreeBSD because someone came and got in my face and
advocated about it. I did it on my own.
FreeBSD got me just by being FreeBSD and by offering what it offers.
No marketing needed.
So I would love it if FreeBSD continues to improve and involve without
being influenced by Linux, Windows or Mac.
-r
Jamie
> FreeBSD should continue to innovate and not imitate.
> I was a Linux (Desktop and Server) user, now I am a FreeBSD user
> (Desktop and Server) and I could not be any happier.
I'm a freebsd server user, tried it on the desktop but some applications
just didn't work.
> I did not install FreeBSD because someone came and got in my face and
> advocated about it. I did it on my own.
Obviously you had to have known about FreeBSD to do it on your own.
> FreeBSD got me just by being FreeBSD and by offering what it offers.
> No marketing needed.
I disagree to some extent, case in point is the jail functionality,
there are linux users who consider chroot to be the same thing, they
simply don't know the difference (worse.. there are packages out there
claiming to give it jail functionality but really it's just a chroot'ed
login, this is misleading)
Performance under heavy load is another thing linux users probably
aren't aware of. (I wasn't!)
It's hard to find a hosting provider that'll do FreeBSD, this I assume
is because people aren't asking for it and people aren't asking for it
because they probably don't know about it (or why it's good for server
level stuff)
Clearly, some "marketing" is needed if we are to have choices in the
future about hosting.
It's not linux users in particular though, a lot of people who *make the
decisions* don't even know what linux is, they just hear a lot of hype
about it and figure "everyone else is using linux, so it must be
better".
I see this all the time with PHP and MySQL, when I suggest postgresql
for some applications, it's "brought to my attention" that postgresql
has "fallen behind" mysql by the business owners who make these
decisions. (and PHP... well.. thats way better.. because it won the
popularity contest)
These are people who don't know what linux or UNIX or referential
integrity is. They don't see that just because it's "easier" to get
started with linux or mysql, it doesn't make them better tools, it
just makes them more popular tools among the masses.
When 20 people say mysql and I say postgresql, in the eyes of someone
who really doesn't know.. they'll always choose mysql.
> So I would love it if FreeBSD continues to improve and involve without
> being influenced by Linux, Windows or Mac.
I don't mind if freebsd takes the good things from linux and mac, I just
hope the base system never requires an X server and a bazillion gnome
libraries... :-)
One thing about linux and marketing, linux HAS done a lot of good toward
bringing alternatives to the windows crowd mindshare.
Roger
>> I was a Linux (Desktop and Server) user, now I am a FreeBSD user
>> (Desktop and Server) and I could not be any happier.
>
> I'm a freebsd server user, tried it on the desktop but some applications
> just didn't work.
>
I experienced the same but instead of dropping FreeBSD and re-considered my
application choices. For example Gnome to awesome window manager.
Firefox to Opera. Of course, some people cannot afford to reconsider their
application choices. Lucky for me, a lot of the applications that I
use, are available
and easy to install from the ports.
>> I did not install FreeBSD because someone came and got in my face and
>> advocated about it. I did it on my own.
>
> Obviously you had to have known about FreeBSD to do it on your own.
>
Well, I got tired of Linux and I thank Linux for being there when I
got tired of
Microsoft. I just prefer the *BSD way better than the Linux way of
grouping software.
Also, I actually found OpenBSD before I found FreeBSD. But FreeBSD had
jails and
the alternative to FreeBSD under OpenBSD was discontinued. And this is
what I'm talking about
when I say that FreeBSD should aim to develop new or implement
technology like that.
Mac is based on FreeBSD so what is there to take from Mac? Graphical
applications?
>> FreeBSD got me just by being FreeBSD and by offering what it offers.
>> No marketing needed.
>
> I disagree to some extent, case in point is the jail functionality,
> there are linux users who consider chroot to be the same thing, they
> simply don't know the difference (worse.. there are packages out there
> claiming to give it jail functionality but really it's just a chroot'ed
> login, this is misleading)
>
Well, fighting ignorance is not that easy. I knew the differences and
that's why
I went with FreeBSD :).
> Performance under heavy load is another thing linux users probably
> aren't aware of. (I wasn't!)
>
Could you elaborate on this point? If you don't mind. I'm always in the
hunt for opportunities to learn what others have experienced.
> It's hard to find a hosting provider that'll do FreeBSD, this I assume
> is because people aren't asking for it and people aren't asking for it
> because they probably don't know about it (or why it's good for server
> level stuff)
>
I'm with you on this one. It still puzzles me. Even though I'm not qualify
yet to provide any theories :)
> Clearly, some "marketing" is needed if we are to have choices in the
> future about hosting.
>
> It's not linux users in particular though, a lot of people who *make the
> decisions* don't even know what linux is, they just hear a lot of hype
> about it and figure "everyone else is using linux, so it must be
> better".
>
I agree with you. My boss understand nothing about Linux yet we are using it.
Just to quote my boss. "I don't love Linux but I hate it more that Linux".
I'm working in a master plan to bring FreeBSD to the light ;). Any tips
would be welcome :).
> I see this all the time with PHP and MySQL, when I suggest postgresql
> for some applications, it's "brought to my attention" that postgresql
> has "fallen behind" mysql by the business owners who make these
> decisions. (and PHP... well.. thats way better.. because it won the
> popularity contest)
>
> These are people who don't know what linux or UNIX or referential
> integrity is. They don't see that just because it's "easier" to get
> started with linux or mysql, it doesn't make them better tools, it
> just makes them more popular tools among the masses.
>
> When 20 people say mysql and I say postgresql, in the eyes of someone
> who really doesn't know.. they'll always choose mysql.
>
I have also been guilty of being influenced by the popular choice.
>> So I would love it if FreeBSD continues to improve and involve without
>> being influenced by Linux, Windows or Mac.
>
> I don't mind if freebsd takes the good things from linux and mac,
It all depends (for me that is) on what should be taken from those camps.
I still have not run into the "I wish FreeBSD had ..... like ........ has"
> I just
> hope the base system never requires an X server and a bazillion gnome
> libraries... :-)
>
Count me on that.
-r
Alex Moura
> (...)
> > Performance under heavy load is another thing linux users probably
> > aren't aware of. (I wasn't!)
>
> Could you elaborate on this point? If you don't mind. I'm always in the
> hunt for opportunities to learn what others have experienced.
>
> > It's hard to find a hosting provider that'll do FreeBSD, this I assume
> > is because people aren't asking for it and people aren't asking for it
> > because they probably don't know about it (or why it's good for server
> > level stuff)
> >
>
> I'm with you on this one. It still puzzles me. Even though I'm not qualify
> yet to provide any theories :)
>
I thought there was plenty of options for FreeBSD hosting around, given its
popularity. Googling this string makes it spit a lot of results, including
jails
hostings.
freebsd '(vps|hosting)'
>
> > Clearly, some "marketing" is needed if we are to have choices in the
> > future about hosting.
> >
> > It's not linux users in particular though, a lot of people who *make the
> > decisions* don't even know what linux is, they just hear a lot of hype
> > about it and figure "everyone else is using linux, so it must be
> > better".
> >
>
> I agree with you. My boss understand nothing about Linux yet we are using
> it.
> Just to quote my boss. "I don't love Linux but I hate it more that Linux".
> I'm working in a master plan to bring FreeBSD to the light ;). Any tips
> would be welcome :).
>
Start here:
FreeBSD Advocacy
http://www.freebsd.org/advocacy/
And there are some enlightening references:
FreeBSD: An Open Source Alternative to Linux
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/linux-comparison/article.html
Twenty Years of Berkeley Unix - From AT&T-Owned to Freely Redistributable
http://oreilly.com/catalog/opensources/book/kirkmck.html
FreeBSD Project Administration and Management
http://www.freebsd.org/administration.html
Regards,
Alex
Charlie Kester
>
>I have also been guilty of being influenced by the popular choice.
>
When it comes to popularity, the question should always be "Popular with
whom?"
Popularity with the masses is a very unreliable indicator of quality or
fitness to the task at hand. On the other hand, if the experts in the
field all express a preference for one thing over another, that's
definitely a good argument for using it yourself.
The trick is in learning who the experts are and what they think about
the matter.
Even better is learning *why* they think thhe way they do -- how they
approach the matter and how they reach their decisions. Then learn to
do that yourself, so you can be your own expert.
I wish I could say my decision to use FreeBSD was based on a process
like that, but it wasn't. For me, it was mostly about aesthetics: I
like my Unix neat, with no chaser.
KAYVEN RIESE
On Sun, 28 Feb 2010, Jamie wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 28, 2010 at 12:49:23PM -0600, Brandon Falk wrote:
> You don't really see GNU-folk bashing BSD, why does BSD have to bash
> GNU? Why not say the GNU complements BSD for certain things?
Actually, I think there are oodles of examples of GPL vs. BSD license
debates.. I suspect one to start here. BSD allows code to be sequestered
into proprietary systems, while GPL does not.
I expect you folks to talk amoungst yourselves now..
>
> Jamie
> --
> http://www.geniegate.com Custom web programming
> Perl * Java * UNIX User Management Solutions
> _______________________________________________
> freebs...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat...@freebsd.org"
>
*----------------------------------------------------------*
Kayven Riese, BSCS, MS (Physiology and Biophysics)
(415) 902 5513 cellular
http://kayve.net
Webmaster http://ChessYoga.org
*----------------------------------------------------------*
KAYVEN RIESE
On Sun, 28 Feb 2010, Jamie wrote:
>
> I see a lot of this going on, from general attitudes to pictures of
> penguines being sexually assaulted. This paints FreeBSD into the the
hahahahaha {:D I love my t-shirt! I think the little bugger likes it!
http://blog.dcbsdcon.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/med_freebsd_fuck_linux.jpg
http://www.monkeyview.net/id/965/lost/lost.vhtml
>
>
> Jamie
> --
> http://www.geniegate.com Custom web programming
> Perl * Java * UNIX User Management Solutions
KAYVEN RIESE
On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Eitan Adler wrote:
>
>> Tell people how great freebsd is, not how crappy linux is. Remind them
>> that we're all "unix-like", so you're not loosing anything by selecting
>> freebsd for server stuff, you can still use linux as a workstation.
>
> And you could still use freeBSD a desktop or Linux as a server.
Forgive me for belaboring the obvious, but meanwhile, but Microsoft
servers are far less indicated.. I'm wondering if anyone feels like
opining on MacOSX's Darwin dirty little secret kernel acting as a server.
Jamie
> 2010/3/1 Roger <rno...@gmail.com>
> I thought there was plenty of options for FreeBSD hosting around, given its
> popularity. Googling this string makes it spit a lot of results, including
> jails
> hostings.
>
> freebsd '(vps|hosting)'
Try to actually find one, not just the google resuls. There aren't many,
I was lucky in that I found a dedicated host, reasonably priced that'll
run freebsd. (and only older ones.. I'm too chicken to upgrade via
remote)
> > I agree with you. My boss understand nothing about Linux yet we are using
> > it.
> > Just to quote my boss. "I don't love Linux but I hate it more that Linux".
> > I'm working in a master plan to bring FreeBSD to the light ;). Any tips
> > would be welcome :).
> >
>
> Start here:
>
> FreeBSD Advocacy
> http://www.freebsd.org/advocacy/
The trouble with advocacy is that, the more you try to flood people with
information, the more turned off they are. It very quickly reaches a
point where they get annoyed with your suggestion and will insist on
doing their thing, simply to spite you.
Haven't had any success with this.. (and rather doubt I will..) but I've
been using the tactic of "It's too bad we don't have FreeBSD's
scheduler, things would probably run more smoothly" or lean base or
jails or.. backups would be easier with snapshots.
But then leave it at that, briefly.
If you start pitching it, people immediately turn away.
KAYVEN RIESE
On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Jamie wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 10:24:19AM -0500, Roger wrote:
>
> It's hard to find a hosting provider that'll do FreeBSD, this I assume
> is because people aren't asking for it and people aren't asking for it
> because they probably don't know about it (or why it's good for server
> level stuff)
Person, Roderick
From: owner-fre...@freebsd.org [owner-fre...@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Jamie [ja...@geniegate.com]
On Mon, Mar 01, 2010 at 03:50:29PM -0300, Alex Moura wrote:
>Try to actually find one, not just the google resuls. There aren't many,
>I was lucky in that I found a dedicated host, reasonably priced that'll
>run freebsd. (and only older ones.. I'm too chicken to upgrade via
>remote)
I use there hobbyist hosting
http://www.pairlite.com/
Royce Williams
Second. I like Pair - they've been rock-solid.
Royce
Jayton Garnett
in use when I started =) with only a few Linux boxes, but they've all been
phased out now.
I'm totally agreed with not waving FreeBSD in people's faces too much - it's
the reason I turned my back on Linux and changed to FreeBSD. Linux was meant
to be the pot of golf at the end of the rainbow... it was more like a pot of
green gooey slush.
Fortunately I saw the other rainbow, which lead me to a pot of gold, in the
form of FreeBSD.
Cheers,
Jay
Matthew Seaman
Hash: SHA1
On 02/03/2010 24:02:31, KAYVEN RIESE wrote:
>
> On Mon, 1 Mar 2010, Eitan Adler wrote:
>>
>>> Tell people how great freebsd is, not how crappy linux is. Remind them
>>> that we're all "unix-like", so you're not loosing anything by selecting
>>> freebsd for server stuff, you can still use linux as a workstation.
>>
>> And you could still use freeBSD a desktop or Linux as a server.
>
> Forgive me for belaboring the obvious, but meanwhile, but Microsoft
> servers are far less indicated.. I'm wondering if anyone feels like
> opining on MacOSX's Darwin dirty little secret kernel acting as a server.
Well, it would probably work pretty well, but what's the benefit you get
from using Darwin like that? Without all the rest of Mac OS X, Darwin
doesn't stand out from the crowd in any particularly interesting ways.
It might be fun to play with, but for a serious workload I'd go FreeBSD.
Cheers,
Matthew
- --
Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard
Flat 3
PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate
Kent, CT11 9PW
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.14 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkuMwXgACgkQ8Mjk52CukIyYjwCglHughjoO4P9bPa/wSbtPCBte
tK8AnRcxvf9tDBJxE4XOJxTFoIyifn/Z
=bsnk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Rick N
> Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 12:49:23 -0600
> From: fal...@gamozo.org
> To: freebs...@freebsd.org
> Subject: FreeBSD Popularity
> _______________________________________________
> freebs...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat...@freebsd.org"
________________________________________________
I hate to get sort-of obvious as to one of many reasons why "Free"BSD will never be popular on the Desktop/Server for the masses,
but here goes:
"BSD was Bill Joy, initially," says McKusick. "He did the distributions and talked about them and pushed them out.
This was way back in the mid-70's. He also gave BSD its NFS, TCP/IP code, "vi", ...
For you younger folk, Bill Joy later beame the "Founder" of Sun Microsystems.
If anyone's not sure what Sun was/is, then forget the rest of this, and just stay with Windows.
;)
..., and how much BSD code was in HP/UX, as well as, ...?
All that and even more was way back then.
Of course even today, we all know what MacOSX's kernel is based on too.
The "BSD License" made all of that, and more possible.
Of all of these corporations, and many more not mentioned, its easy to see that they(the corporate powers that be)
were NOT promoting us to use FreeBSD "freely", in fact they were/are selling us their own BSD,
and their hardware,...
Also, any "history of corporate capitalism" will tell you why this is so, in every facet.
Obviously, "Big Brother" will never want you to use it without paying.
This is why Windows, MacOSX is the most popular to most people ?
THEY do not want "Free"BSD popular, because comparatively, that would mean(after you pay for your car), you'd get to drive it for free.
-in as much as Ford,(who apparently has a patent for a "water engine"), won't/can't let "water" become the "Popular" Fuel for the masses.
(Of all the above though, Bill Joy's Sun earned the right to do whatever he wanted.)
----------------------------------
However, the commercial afterbirth's produced, and sold, because of FreeBSD make it very popular to "them" and us by design.
(...hence, MacOSX, ...)
Free/Net/OpenBSD will probably always remain much more "popular" to the real unix-ish coders(software\hardware developers),
than the average Joe, like u, and me.
It's afterall their work, with a little help from our feedback, that keeps it goin'.
-> But, summarily, and because BSD is legally, and whatever else MORE "Free" that Linux, it will never be more popular than Linux, on the Desktop/server.
:(
---------------------------------
In retrospect, I admit, FreeBSD became more popular to me because I learned how to use it first(before the Linux goldrush), and install it, still enjoying the fruits of those labours'.
And yes though, what I really cannot understand is, -Why the heck did IBM pick RedFart/GPL*?, instead of FreeBSD/BSD Lic. ??? -and that, I would luv to understand.!?
cheers.
Rick.
_________________________________________________________________
Live connected with Messenger on your phone
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9712958_______________________________________________
Kevin Kinsey
>
> -> But, summarily, and because BSD is legally,
> and whatever else MORE "Free" that Linux, it will
> never be more popular than Linux, on the Desktop/server.
Hmm, need to check for facts, but I think the point
is made. Given a choice at a restaurant of water for
free, or Iced Tea/"Soda Pop" (or w/e they call it in
your neck o'the woods) for a nickel, most people would
choose the latter despite the cost and the fact that
water's really better for them.
KDK
KAYVEN RIESE
Umm.. Really? Why is Avion, Arrowhead.. do I need to name any more
names..?.. in business then?
>
> KDK
> _______________________________________________
> freebs...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat...@freebsd.org"
>
*----------------------------------------------------------*
Sam Fourman Jr.
> entities. Which is a *good* thing.
>
Explain your point on this? BSD is supposed to be commercial friendly.
Sam Fourman Jr.
Fourman Networks
Frank Shute
I saw Linux go from a sort of hobbiest system to what it is now, where
most of the patches come from RedHat, IBM and Novell.
These patches are focussed on whatever those big companies are
focussed on ATM which doesn't necessarily coincide with what the
user base wants.
For instance, who cares that Linux is patched to run on IBM Z-series?
IBM. Not me.
So you get a lot of cruft in the kernel which has nothing to do with
the desires of the user base but it's what a PHB at IBM wants.
Yes, there are companies whom use and support FreeBSD but their say
on FreeBSD development is limited and usually welcome. I'm thinking of
Juniper.
My belief is that the FreeBSD license puts off the big commercial
players because it's written in clear English and can be written on
half a page of A4.
This puts the ball in the PHB's court unlike the GPL's reams of
legalese which is punted along to the legal department. i.e the PHB
can pass the buck and hence GPL software is used.
That's just a guess. I can't think why a license, that allows more
freedom than an obtuse license that is dependent on the uncertain
interpretation of a judge, is used.
Rick N
somewhere,..., According to Gates, GPLd software (Linux):
"makes it impossible for a commercial company to use any of that work or build on any of that work. So what you saw with TCP/IP or Sendmail, NFS,..., or the browser could never happen."
I suppose this is exactly why BIG corps like Apple,and Juniper, and ..., chose *BSD code initially,
But am I glad that Linux's GPL is protecting my bank card in some ATM ? -careful now.
:)
> Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 12:26:51 +0000
> From: fr...@shute.org.uk
> To: sfou...@gmail.com
> CC: freebs...@freebsd.org; fal...@gamozo.org
> Subject: Re: FreeBSD Popularity
> _______________________________________________
> freebs...@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat...@freebsd.org"
_________________________________________________________________
Check your Hotmail from your phone.
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9712957_______________________________________________