To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I've used FreeBSD for a while on the desktop, but I already had a few years Linux experience (which we had running on servers at work) and too many things were the same, slightly different or very different.
In the end I found it too confusing to be using both so I sadly had to let go of FreeBSD.
Personally I find switching between Windows and *nix more confusing than switching between Arch, Debian, SLES, Solaris and FreeBSD every day.
At least with the different *nix's, they're all largely POSIX and any terminal mistakes takes just a couple of seconds to spot (eg using ps ax in Solaris, forgetting I need to use the hyphened switches instead).
Switching between Windows and *nix, I'm confronted with not only a different type of terminal shell entirely (the number of times I type ls into cmd.exe is just embarrassing), but a completely different file system hierarchy and even a unique different.
Quite honestly, it almost always takes me 5 or 10 minutes of guess work before I've readjusted to Windows.
Edited 2013-01-25 12:49 UTC





Member since:
2009-08-18
When I used to use BSD systems as a desktop, is because I didn't want to use Linux after a lot of it at the time was not particularly well documented compared to other systems like OpenBSD.
I've always preferred the OpenBSD ... if we say it supported it works, if we say it doesn't it doesn't or is likely to cause headaches.