Jan Stedehouder has used PC-BSD for thirty days to see what living with it is like. On day thirty, he concludes: "Does PC-BSD have the potential to be a serious contender for the open source desktop? I answered that question with a yes, because the potential is there. The solid FreeBSD roots, the very strong and very accessible information, the friendly and mature community and the PBI system provide the foundations for that potential. I don't think it is ready now and I couldn't recommend it yet to someone in the early stages of moving away from Windows to an open source desktop. But I do think that the PC-BSD team has the right target audience in mind and is building an system and a support system that addresses it's needs."
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-05-19
DesktopBSD isn't a FreeBSD distribution as such. It's actually "just" a pre-configured FreeBSD installation, rather than a distribution built on FreeBSD as PC-BSD is. Installing applications on DesktopBSD is done through ports, which is much more to my liking.
Again I hear FUD from die hard FreeBSD fan who never tried PC-BSD- there is no difference in DesktopBSD and PC-BSD at all- PBI is add-on package manager- that's all. Everything in PC-BSD is built from ports (without any modification BTW) and just added couple of separate tools for system configuration like "user manager" and "Firewall GUI" which is not ready for production because there is so much options in PF (OpenBSD Packet Filter). It take a time to complete and polish operating system- Microsoft developed Windows for 10 years until it become barely usable.
Member since:2006-07-15
Member since:
2005-10-02
I'm looking forward to the series on DesktopBSD. It's much more to my liking than PC-BSD.
DesktopBSD isn't a FreeBSD distribution as such. It's actually "just" a pre-configured FreeBSD installation, rather than a distribution built on FreeBSD as PC-BSD is. Installing applications on DesktopBSD is done through ports, which is much more to my liking.
Personally I use Gentoo Linux (apart from Windows, Syllable, SkyOS and DesktopBSD) but IMHO Portage is a bloated overengineered version of ports. Or put this way: ports are portage done right