Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th May 2009 19:06 UTC
We all know them. We all hate them. They are generally overdone, completely biased, or so vague they border on the edge of pointlessness (or toppled over said edge). Yes, I'm talking about those "Is Linux ready for the desktop" articles. Still, this one is different.
Thread beginning with comment 364368
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: It is on my desktop already
by DavidSan on Tue 19th May 2009 18:08
in reply to "RE[2]: It is on my desktop already"
Member since:2008-11-18
Yeah right.. FreeBSD is a server operating system... You just sound as a Linux geek, they just do not know what a desktop operating system is or needs to do.
Maybe that's why Linux is free, and it is only used in servers. Desktop, less than 1% market share... Oops, sorry, this year Linux got 1%, spread about 300 distros.
I would argue that between the 2, FreeBSD is a better desktop OS then Linux. A unified code base with a specific set of core programs that leave a function system. Different from the Linux philosophy where Linux is the kernel ONLY and each distro slaps stuff on top of it in a different fashion. The thing Linux has going for it is commercial support which is rather sad. It would be far, far easier for commercial companies to target FreeBSD. There is only one target to track and the license is far more permissive. The real problem was in the early 90's a lawsuit scared off many potential commercial vendors and the ball started rolling to Linux. Unfortunately, it snowballed and Linux is still rolling.
FreeBSD has better sound support, with virtual hardware mixing built into the kernel. However, it does lack some device drivers. X, the GUI apps, etc.. are all identical to Linux so it really isn't better or worse. In my experience, BSD performs far better under system load then Linux when running X. Linux tends to "freeze" up when under load even when trying to login to a SSH terminal. FreeBSD allows for better logins and end user performance when under heavy load.
All in all, if Adobe released Flash for BSD I would use it as a primary system in a heart beat. nVidia driver support for x64 should be coming in the fall 8.0 release as well, so one less reason to run Linux.
As someone stated above, Linux / BSD let you do what you want to do with a computer. Windows lets you do what it thinks you want to do. Of course, it's also very easy to totally destroy your system in Linux / BSD due to this, but in the end it's a better way of doing things and I would pick Linux / BSD over Windows as a primary desktop any day.
Maybe that's why Linux is free, and it is only used in servers. Desktop, less than 1% market share... Oops, sorry, this year Linux got 1%, spread about 300 distros.
I would argue that between the 2, FreeBSD is a better desktop OS then Linux. A unified code base with a specific set of core programs that leave a function system. Different from the Linux philosophy where Linux is the kernel ONLY and each distro slaps stuff on top of it in a different fashion. The thing Linux has going for it is commercial support which is rather sad. It would be far, far easier for commercial companies to target FreeBSD. There is only one target to track and the license is far more permissive. The real problem was in the early 90's a lawsuit scared off many potential commercial vendors and the ball started rolling to Linux. Unfortunately, it snowballed and Linux is still rolling.
FreeBSD has better sound support, with virtual hardware mixing built into the kernel. However, it does lack some device drivers. X, the GUI apps, etc.. are all identical to Linux so it really isn't better or worse. In my experience, BSD performs far better under system load then Linux when running X. Linux tends to "freeze" up when under load even when trying to login to a SSH terminal. FreeBSD allows for better logins and end user performance when under heavy load.
All in all, if Adobe released Flash for BSD I would use it as a primary system in a heart beat. nVidia driver support for x64 should be coming in the fall 8.0 release as well, so one less reason to run Linux.
As someone stated above, Linux / BSD let you do what you want to do with a computer. Windows lets you do what it thinks you want to do. Of course, it's also very easy to totally destroy your system in Linux / BSD due to this, but in the end it's a better way of doing things and I would pick Linux / BSD over Windows as a primary desktop any day.
Well, I have to agree with you on your arguments. FreeBSD is less a mess than Linux distros. But FreeBSD is not aimed at desktop but server... PC-BSD would be better for desktop, in my opinion.
Member since:
2006-05-12
Maybe that's why Linux is free, and it is only used in servers. Desktop, less than 1% market share... Oops, sorry, this year Linux got 1%, spread about 300 distros.
I would argue that between the 2, FreeBSD is a better desktop OS then Linux. A unified code base with a specific set of core programs that leave a function system. Different from the Linux philosophy where Linux is the kernel ONLY and each distro slaps stuff on top of it in a different fashion. The thing Linux has going for it is commercial support which is rather sad. It would be far, far easier for commercial companies to target FreeBSD. There is only one target to track and the license is far more permissive. The real problem was in the early 90's a lawsuit scared off many potential commercial vendors and the ball started rolling to Linux. Unfortunately, it snowballed and Linux is still rolling.
FreeBSD has better sound support, with virtual hardware mixing built into the kernel. However, it does lack some device drivers. X, the GUI apps, etc.. are all identical to Linux so it really isn't better or worse. In my experience, BSD performs far better under system load then Linux when running X. Linux tends to "freeze" up when under load even when trying to login to a SSH terminal. FreeBSD allows for better logins and end user performance when under heavy load.
All in all, if Adobe released Flash for BSD I would use it as a primary system in a heart beat. nVidia driver support for x64 should be coming in the fall 8.0 release as well, so one less reason to run Linux.
As someone stated above, Linux / BSD let you do what you want to do with a computer. Windows lets you do what it thinks you want to do. Of course, it's also very easy to totally destroy your system in Linux / BSD due to this, but in the end it's a better way of doing things and I would pick Linux / BSD over Windows as a primary desktop any day.