Sup Forums, why aren't you using a BSD operating system?

Sup Forums, why aren't you using a BSD operating system?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc._v._Berkeley_Software_Design,_Inc.
forums.pcbsd.org/archive/index.php/thread-14943.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses.
freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html
serverfault.com/questions/36359/why-is-linux-more-popular-than-bsd
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

i am

Less online resources than Linux and the lack of software/drivers. Furthermore I plan to create a Linux only DE developer

Doesn't support my hardware (bluetooth, my wifi card, peripherals)
I use gentoo on my main computer, which is somewhat bsd-like in package management
the whole idea of having a cohesive core system is pretty cool, so i might run it in a VM, but linux works so well day to day that i can forgive its haphazardness

I tried freebsd and I learned to fear every update. I then moved to mint and then to lubuntu.

I am

Drivers, lack of. And the lack of LVM support. And the lack of LUKS.

because it's 2017
not 1977

I made the mistake of buying hardware made after 2006

ZFS, geli

Running FreeBSD on relatively new hardware here(2014ish)

Because Windows 10 is better

So my 6600k and rx480 will work fine?

because I'm a gamer.

I choose to rock Linux Mint 18.1 Cinnamon Edition "Serena" on the bare metal of my rig

I'm running OpenBSD on an old computer I don't know what to do with (Pentium 4 uniprocessor, 1 GB RAM, IDE hard drives, came with XP). It works pretty well; I like the idea of a stable and audited base system that you can run by itself, but for desktop use, you pretty much need at least a few ports.

It might, I suggest you look it up(just like you would if you were looking to use fully FOSS drivers). If it doesn't, well, shit. But the statement that only ancient hardware is supported is false :)

Newest amd support is 7660
Newest igpu support is haswell
So no

bsd is CIA compromised
no thanks

Nice FUD

Why would I want to use it over Linux? What (practical, not philosophical) advantages does it have?

Working overtime, agent Johnson?

ebin

BSD has no drivers!

>smaller operating systems have less hardware support
whodathunkit

Jesus christ, you are high in denial, aren't you. BSD has no drivers and that's a well known fact. Instead of shilling BSD why don't you write drivers yourself for us "plebs" as suggested in your autism thread?

Everything I've ever tried running BSD on has had wonderful support, and I've never purchased hardware with BSD support in mind.

False, but...
>not writing your own drivers

about to install FreeBSD 9.3 on my Dell Mini1012 netbook. It's currently running Windows 7 and Kali 2016.2. I'm going to nuke the win7 partition and replace it with FreeBSD.

a few ports??? Nah b, you need a LOT of ports. I have a 2GHz P4 w/2GB RAM running OpenBSD 5.8 and to get it to be usable as a desktop I had to install a grip of ports. It's always been that way.

It entirely depends on what you do and the programs you use to do it. Mileage will vary.

I already tried that abortion of an OS.
The real question here is, "Who the fuck is paying you to shill this crap?"

because its connected to psychos (at&t) that gladly sell all of your info you trusted them with.

...

being this ignorant
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNIX_System_Laboratories,_Inc._v._Berkeley_Software_Design,_Inc.

single unrelenting bsd troll runs these threads.

See pic
TLDR: It's micorsoft

>software created by canonical

as if they offer value to anyone

>the BSD kernel
There is no common kernel, they're independent projects. OpenBSD has its own kernel, FreeBSD has its own kernel, NetBSD has its own kernel, etc.

What laptops work well with BSD?

No laptops work well with BSD

Latitude XT2 with OpenBSD

ebin

I am! Sort of. On another computer. My T60p that I wasn't using much before.

I installed OpenBSD a couple days ago. It's pretty intense compared to GNU/Linux, but I'm trying to slowly figure stuff out. It seems neat.

I've had my T60p freeze from closing the lid to go to sleep and also from docking it while it was already on. In both scenarios the lights remained on, but none of my input worked, and I was unable to reach the machine from ssh even. With the sleep freeze, the network had been disabled for sleep. The docking incident was a bit stranger. It wasn't refusing my ssh connection, so it was definitely still slightly alive, but it also wasn't accepting it. It was just kind of hanging.

Can't tell you much about battery life, as I generally have it plugged it. I've got the 9cell with most of its charge and I know it lasts at least an hour or two off the charger with openbsd. Wifi works fine. Connected out of the box during the install. Never had to plug in ethernet. I think that covers most laptop-specific things...

youre the biggest troll I've ever encountered

i want to be relevant in modern day society

That's what you get for using a dead router OS for desktops
Truth hurts, doesn't it?

>That's what you get for using a dead router OS for desktops
It's not really a big deal. It still works for what I used it for when it had Arch on it. I keep it hooked to speakers by my bed for when I want to play some music. I have cmus running inside tmux. I use sshfs to mount my file server's music library to play from. This all works. One complaint is that it's harder to adjust volume on openbsd.

what a surprise, the bsd thread on Sup Forums is full of misinformation and trolling. never seen this happen before.

oh yeah that really sums it all up. you win. anecdotal evidence from a PC-BSD install error represents the whole experience.

i've heard better arguments from 100 view youtube videos & comments.

That's kind of why nobody takes Sup Forums seriously anymore. It's a place where you go exclusively to shitpost. There's literally nothing good left here. I remember having discussions here with people who actually wrote a line of meaningful code in their life

because im poor and stupid?

how do you even make that big jump?

i think he forgot "not" in between "im" and "poor"

because BSD was left in the dust of GNU.

makes sense

gamas

Because I like to use R B A C on Linux

Because I don't want to help Cisco for free. Also
>no drivers

>gamas

This.

I'm comfortable with what I'm using now. I might put FreeBSD on my netbook after I upgrade it though.

Reading the original post here and laughing my ass off.

forums.pcbsd.org/archive/index.php/thread-14943.html

>u should just learn how its different

>If you want to check out PC-BSD, put it on a less important box
>less important box

>yeah go install something else then

>Excuse me, Achtually, bsd wuz furst

>U should just think differently

>3 pages of text about how BSD *must* drop all software because muh code purity and nothing is autistic enough for me

No solutions posted. I don't understand why the bsd-shitcommunity is so masturbatory over this idea of pretending they're approachable. Just put up a 72 pt "FUCK OFF PLEBS!!!!!" on the download link and stop trying to continue this farce. Be free. Embrace the 'tism, and just shoot yourself once you lose financial support or welfare.

No drivers for my hardware.

Forgot to mention I'm running GNU/Linux for gaming.

>worse multithreading than Lunix
>shit non functional/bad drivers
>filesystem worse than ext4
>slow bootup
that's why

>ZFS
>worse than Ext4

AES-256 Encrypted Root on ZFS with GELI, dtrace in base, a complete lack of systemd (which is developed for Lenneart Poetterings laptop, and nothing else), the handbook (over 600 pages of central documentation), jails (containers, but predate docker and are persistent), the fact that it has a base system with ports (base system is in /usr, stuff installed from ports is in /usr/local).

As long as FOSS programmers don't abandon POSIX compatability (which people like Lennart Poettering want them to, for whatever reason; probably the same reason he wants Linux to be 1 OS and not a myriad of distributions, in an effort to "win" against Microsoft, possibly?), software can be easily ported to FreeBSD (and most of it already has, /usr/ports contains +26000 entries).

They're all forked from BSD 4.3 Reno, though.

>slow bootup
As opposed to systemd which manages to be inconsistent about booting? Besides, OpenRC is being worked on (and is making its way into TrueOS soon) and that should fix the "issue".

, Software has been more important than hardware ever since the 70s. You buy hardware for the software you want to run on it, not the other way around.

/usr/ports/games has over 1000 - it's only missing Steam, because Valve wrote Steam for x86, not AMD64 - and the FreeBSD Linux compatability layer is only AMD64-compatible. And as long as the game has POSIX compatability, it can probably run on FreeBSD with little to no effort.

>They're all forked from BSD 4.3 Reno, though.
Which was quite a long time ago.

1990, if I recall correctly.

First part of my post was supposed to be an answer to

Why should I?

Drivers. Linux has them, bsd does not.

I have no problems on my x220 and my w520.

thinkpads

you should try Microsoft Windows 10.

The intellectual pleasure of using a true Unix.

That is like asking why are not using 486 instead of Core i7.

BSD/UNIX were the experimental prototypes of modern operating systems, now that we have Windows, MacOS and Linux distros, we don't need to waste time with obsolete garbage.

>inb4 cuck licence
Fucking educate yourselves en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BSD_licenses.

>they're stealing your code
Nobody is stealing anything.
In whatever form they redistribute your software, be it source or just binary, they have to give you credit and cannot give any credit to themselves whatsoever without your permission.

>companies can redistribute your software only in binary form and never give you anything back
Why the fuck would they even do that?
I mean they can, but either way they can still sell your software and not share any of their profits with you (the same applies to GPL software).
Keeping a project open source does not diminish their profits usually because they will sell your software as part of something larger or wrapped differently.
Apple integrates their open source Darwin OS with OS X and iOS which are selled together with computers and phones.
Android and much of Google's software is open source, but they don't profit directly from that.
Red Hat can still sell, even if the OS is almost completely open source.
They can also keep a project open source, then stop publishing the source and then after some time sell it.

>why is it not in their best interest to distribute only binaries all the time?
Who do they have to call if something goes wrong? You.
Why? Because they know jack shit about the project you wrote especially if it's a larger one.
By refusing to share the source code they're just both your and their project.
Why? Because you may accept their patches in the upstream or just implement some of those ideas in your own way if it's beneficial to your project and they can then expand on that and so on.
There doesn't have to be much collaboration in order to make this a healthy relationship, but there needs to be some.

You aren't "cucked" for using a BSD licence more than for using any other open source licence.

How many packages? Post screenfetch. I am appalled that LM installs 3000 packages by default. So much bloat.

...

>*BSD
>obsolete
weak bait

>installing old version
>installking kali
why?

Sup Forums is such absolute shit. This entire thread:

>well Linux is more user friendly, why use BSD?

But change the discussion to about macOS:

>macOS is shit, gtfo shill

On top of that, this thread is clearly full of people who never got past the install phase of a modern BSD. OpenBSD, FreeBSD, even NetBSD have dead simple installers. Each of them provide simple documentation on getting X working. The FreeBSD handbook is some of the best documentation for an operating system even written.

On top of that, the philosophical argument is one to seriously consider. The GNU tool chain and many other Linux programs clearly don't match up with the UNIX philosophy of simplicity, modularity and doing one thing well. If you value these things, you cannot separate your computing experience from the philosophy in good conscience.

Forget desktops, most servers back end run Windows server, Redhat and Oracle. BSD is a meme.

t. mactoddler that obsesses about BSD

Nice argument. I am not surprised contemplation on the philosophy associated with computing is too much for your tripfag brain. Back to /w/ desktop threads. Unless you have something worth saying, you lost.

>UNIX philosophy
Sells for money. Apple brought it as well

UNIX is an antiquated proprietary system literally nobody cares.

Your arguments amount to tinfoil giberish, the GPL and Linux are the free software movement, BSD is irrelevant now.

Just because he's "Le Geat Linux Torvalds" doesn't mean his opinion is right and absolute.
Thousands of BSD devs don't agree with that statement for very good reasons.

freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/bsdl-gpl/article.html

>In contrast to the GPL, which is designed to prevent the proprietary commercialization of Open Source code, the BSD license places minimal restrictions on future behavior. This allows BSD code to remain Open Source or become integrated into commercial solutions, as a project's or company's needs change. In other words, the BSD license does not become a legal time-bomb at any point in the development process.

>In addition, since the BSD license does not come with the legal complexity of the GPL or LGPL licenses, it allows developers and companies to spend their time creating and promoting good code rather than worrying if that code violates licensing.

Companies are inclinced to steer clear of GPLd code. that's for sure.
They can and do collaborate on BSD licenced software, which will they later sell as closed source, but in turn make the original software grow.
It's basically paying the companies to help you. Which is fine.

>Thousands of BSD devs don't agree with that statement for very good reasons.

And they are wrong, as the market has already proven.

>Thousands of BSD devs
>thousands
user. that's a little stretch

Chuckled.

>Linux is more user friendly, why use BSD
it's not; freebsd is as user friendly as debian

Debian isn't user friendly though.

serverfault.com/questions/36359/why-is-linux-more-popular-than-bsd

get a room and fuck off >>>/reddit/

>/why-is-linux-more-popular-than-bsd
>why linux is popular
>linux is popular
Now that's a progress

>why-is-linux-more-popular-than-bsd
Short answer? The GPL promotes innovation and fair competition.

BSD promotes dead forks and proprietary software.

It isn't rocket science any moron can see why BSD fails, including Torvalds.

Windows >>> Mac >>> BSD >>> Loonix

>I can't into BSD thread

Cry more, Autism/Linux babies, if you can't put effort and time in your OS don't install a BSD system.

It's that simple.

>lose argument
>"let's start over, shall we?"

If you go purely by growth its more like...
Linux>Android>Windows

BSD never grew lol.

Linux is cuckold communist trash. BSD is not cucked and is pro white and not controlled by kikes.