> Tell people to use BSD > Compare it with Linux > Use Windows
@IzludeTingel
9 ай бұрын
Them: FreeBSD is not for gaming. SONY: Wow, FreeBSD is a perfect OS to base our Orbis OS on for gaming.
@MatrixMaverick1980
7 ай бұрын
With a lot of propriety stuffs added.
@DoubtingThomas333
6 ай бұрын
Why do you think this is? It's free my guy. Then these companies add their own stuff to it.
@magnusm4
5 ай бұрын
@@DoubtingThomas333 That and it's not locked to the GNU rules of being free and open. You can modify and commercially sell your version of BSD.
@theperfectionist1607
5 ай бұрын
@@magnusm4This is both a positive and negative because Sony basically exploits FreeBSD grabs the codebase without contributing back. With Linux however the soulless corporations actually contribute stuff back.
@Jokerlevin
5 ай бұрын
Them: FreeBSD is not for gaming Sony: True but we have to keep our source code open if we use linux so we'll steal code from freebsd while not contributing anything to the eco system. Thanks!
@joaopauloalbq
9 ай бұрын
Wait a minute, are you using Windows and Edge? I can tell that you are indeed a typical BSD user.
@agiledevart
9 ай бұрын
I use different machines for all kinds of stuff, flexibility is king
@pikachuchujelly7628
8 ай бұрын
No, the typical FreeBSD developer just uses Safari on a MacBook and just runs FreeBSD in a VM instead of on their main PC.
@deedend
6 ай бұрын
That shows that unfortunately, FreeBSD is not a proper full-time alternative. So sad, because the state of Linux is not so good at the moment
@pikachuchujelly7628
6 ай бұрын
@@deedend It's still good if you are lucky enough to have hardware that supports it well. Software isn't much of an issue, since it will run Linux programs (even Steam games). I wouldn't put it on a laptop, though, since it doesn't have great power management features.
@mhelmreich1
6 ай бұрын
I have just put together a FreeBSD system as a desktop installation with the key software I use, I had an issue with midnight commander not being happy with the shell configuration. I couldn't figure out how to overcome it, I did a google search and found that others had the same issue, and the solution was to append -u to the mc command. I have been using Linux since 1998, and have not had this particular issue. I also had a library minor version number problem, and I had only had installed software using pkg. I was able to overcome the problem by using ports and compiling, ports are an excellent way of dealing with source code. I generally use Debian Linux or derivatives, and I haven't had the same minor version number issues with apt. I really love how you can take a hard drive out of a Linux machine, put it in completely different machine and more often than not it will just boot up and work without messing around with hardware drivers. I tried the same with BSD, and it was not happy :/
@luigitech3169
7 ай бұрын
- Archlinux manual has much more info in deep - Most of FreeBSD desktops are developped on Linux by non-FreeBSD devs - FreeBSD does not support docker which is basically a standard for services - FreeBSD supports much less hardware
@johndoublew3060
4 ай бұрын
muh docker
@derhorst1398
2 ай бұрын
- You never read the FreeBSD documentation - Most of the Linux desktop history comes from X - Docker is the worst security issue, so FreeBSD uses its own jail concept - FreeBSD doesn't provide alpha drivers Any other questions or comments?
@henrymoss2366
2 ай бұрын
@@derhorst1398The FreeBSD documentation in some sections is fine, in others it just sucks. Linux now has Wayland and is trying to leave the stinking Unix legacy shit behind. Yes man, anyone can say that X is a security problem but on a technical level no one shows the problem they found. FreeBSD provides no alpha drivers and no decent modern shit. I don't have any questions...FreeBSD is a shitty operating system stuck in the past and the glories of Unix.
@derhorst1398
2 ай бұрын
@@henrymoss2366 "Chapter 6. Wayland" Sorry, you don't know what you're talking about. Alpha driver for servers ... all right... 🤦♂
@henrymoss2366
2 ай бұрын
@@derhorst1398 I know what I'm talking about, and for many years, BSD's advertising consisted of criticizing Linux, but they never managed to get out of their hole. They tried to adapt FreeBSD to the desktop with PC-BSD, TrueOS, and failed. Why? 1. Their idiotic elitism. 2. Their advertising was lacking; you can't base your image on criticizing others or clinging to the past glories of Unix. Also, you can't say that your system is Unix because it is not; FreeBSD nowadays is a Unix-like system just like Linux or GNU/Linux. 3. BSDs were primarily developed for the server environment, so even though you can install a desktop environment with some difficulty, they are not as flexible and versatile as Linux. Even Slackware, considered the Linux distribution closest to Unix of old, is more flexible and user-friendly. BSDs perform well on a small server, but they are not ideal for desktop use. In contrast, Linux has distributions that only include stable packages and are more robust and stable than FreeBSD.
@DV-ml4fm
9 ай бұрын
The web browsers in Bsd don't play DRM content. Linux does.
@swordoftheend_
9 ай бұрын
DRM content is lame anyways
@DV-ml4fm
9 ай бұрын
@swordoftheend_ Don't care for it either but some websites uses it for their content.
@s0m4guy
9 ай бұрын
you can select widevine for chromium when compiling it through ports
@DV-ml4fm
9 ай бұрын
@@s0m4guy That's good to know. Thanks
@trajectoryunown
9 ай бұрын
DRM shouldn't exist.
@TheSteveSteele
3 ай бұрын
I’ll give you the one perfect reason. The Linux community on KZitem. FreeBSD or even Haiku OS will do. “Can’t we all just get along?”
@typingcat
2 ай бұрын
Ugh, obviously no.
@optimus888amicus
8 ай бұрын
Hello, everyone ! Very good ! I use FreeBSD on Second Computer
@O...Maiden...O
8 ай бұрын
Coincidentally, when watching this video, I tried to install freeBSD 14 on my old laptop (dell precision m4500) and was unable to install the GUI (xfce4) because of an incompatibility error with the current ABI version, a simple problem and solution is to just install the older version xorg package, i thought so, but not with BSD, i haven't been able to find that xorg package (i need version 1.20 instead of current version 21.1 ), and everyone in the freeBSD forum couldn't help me, finally returned to Debian where everything went smoothly.
@JanKowalski-vj9py
7 ай бұрын
FreeBSD 14 is absolute disaster for older machines. There's complete compatibility mess betweeen drivers and ABI version, there's no way to find what is compatible with what. As a result I decided to quit with FreeBSD unless compatibility rules between video drivers and xorg will be resolved or proper advice what to install will be provided, otherwise no GUI will be possible. It seems also that with FreeBSD 14 there's no way to propery install KDE from sources. What was touble-free in previous versions is simply impossible now. Another utmost stupidity is lack of portsnap in basic installation. This makes the instalation of the system with compiled ports impossible as ports tree is not here and requires various tricks to be downloaded and installled. Ubuntu 22.04 serves well though they too in 2023 versions for uknown reason made grub unworkable. It no longer shows a well known menu at the start so it's impossible to say is grub installed or not. It's beyond imagination how it was possible to release version that effectively denies use of menu base grub.
@essix322
7 ай бұрын
Use ports tree for that
@guestc142
5 ай бұрын
I installed FreeBSD 13 on my latitude and put xfce4 on it and it works just fine. Maybe 14 is different.
@O...Maiden...O
5 ай бұрын
@@guestc142 The issue is compatibility between vga driver and xorg
@guestc142
5 ай бұрын
@@O...Maiden...O that's really weird. My latitude has a VGA port and I managed to put a second monitor alongside it, it was fine for me.
@stubaccount
6 ай бұрын
"LINUX AND FREEBSD LOOK THE SAME", nice troll, bruv
@MarkusHobelsberger
3 ай бұрын
I recently installed FreeBSD 14 on a spare SSD and I was surprised how well it runs and how broad software availability actually is. Coming from Linux I expected to miss a lot of programs. If I were to set up some kind of simple fileserver/NAS I'd totally go BSD just for the better ZFS intregration.
@Maisonier
Ай бұрын
Like truenas?
@andysurfer318
9 ай бұрын
Lets go Lots of freebsd haters in linux community
@JanKowalski-vj9py
7 ай бұрын
No. Version 14 of FreeBSD went out of control making heaps of horrible problems with desktop installlation. There's a complete mess between xorg ABI version and its support in video drivers. Simply saying the drivers that worked with older version do not work at all with new xorg. There's no way do downgrade the only possible solution is to install old FreeBSD version. So nothing strange Linux fans do not see any reason to try FreeBSD - most probably it won't install as expected.
@guestc142
5 ай бұрын
@@JanKowalski-vj9pywell? Use FreeBSD 13. Nothing is stopping them doing it.
@spicydeath82
9 ай бұрын
The only thing i know about freebsd is that sony uses it for their PlayStation OS since the ps 3.
@TexasTrucker-nx8dd
8 ай бұрын
Don't forget about Apple OSX and iPhones
@NitroNilz
7 ай бұрын
Don't forget it is what is serving Netflixes videos to the world. And yahoo. And some Nintendo handheld. And many storage and firewall solutions. And much more. 😈
@kittenzrulz2314
7 ай бұрын
Take a guess how much Sony has given back to FreeBSD considering it powers their OS Absolutely nothing
@deedend
6 ай бұрын
@@TexasTrucker-nx8dd it's just an unrecognizable fork, that has been completely changed from the root
@mchi2214
5 ай бұрын
That has been hacked by george hotz. Lol
@DavidStarkers
7 ай бұрын
Is there a Bluetooth stack yet?
@mchi2214
5 ай бұрын
Hahahaha
@eugrus
8 ай бұрын
02:50 FreeBSD port maintainers patch the source code from the upstream of other open source projects just like a package maintainer of a(ny) Linux distro does. How good it's done mostly depends on a certain maintainer of a certain package in a certain project.
@northof-62
4 ай бұрын
From time to time I try the latest BSD versions on my laptops, without success. My latest attempt was a HP Pavilion from 2015 and FreeBSD. It installed fine but of course didn't detect the RTL8723 wifi chip. But a USB A6100 worked after setting it up and rebooting. So I downloaded xorg and did the Handbook routines for getting a desktop up and running. It ended there, stuck on loading modules. Apparently there is a display problem with BSD and these HP laptops. GhostBSD also just gives up getting their live installer GUI up on these machines. Next up is my ThinkPad L480, again - not new, but it has TPM 2 and secure boot if I set it, which I have with the current Solus Linux 4.5 (a brilliant and underrated OS). Let's go! Update: Success on my Thinkpad L480 (with only standard wifi - no 5G, but still working! ) I like it - went with GhostBSD which is faster to get up and running.
@pewolo
7 ай бұрын
I've been a FreeBSD user for 5 years now. But to be honest with you, it sucks: - Slow internet speed - No Bluetooth support out the box - Printer's support configuration is like hell, - Difficult to display WiFi icon on gnome desktop - Installing new apps sometimes remove most of the installed ones and the list goes on and on
@manuell3505
7 ай бұрын
You're joking about internet speed, right? FreeBSD achieves exactly the bandwidth that the hardware allows. I believe it's close to 93% for common TCP/IP activities. So with 100mbit you get 93 mbit of data transfer. The other 7 is for the protocol data. Same for any clean linux. In the whole OSS world, if such things for some reason get slower than they should be, that's considered unacceptable. Not going to be implemented at all.
@redwillrise
7 ай бұрын
so it sucks but you've been using it for five years...? 1. have you done anything to troubleshoot the issue? 2. granted this is irritating if all you have is a bluetooth keyboard, but it makes sense considering FreeBSD is more server-centric and aims for a rather minimal install & all you have to do is get the driver and write one line into rc.conf ... if a driver exists, that is 3. I have no experience with that, so not going to comment 4. it's hard to say whether this is even a FreeBSD problem - it could be GNOME, it could be the widget, could be X11... 5. excuse me?
@essix322
7 ай бұрын
Is this guy trolling ?
@manuell3505
7 ай бұрын
@@essix322 Apple, probably. ^^
@essix322
7 ай бұрын
@@manuell3505 XD , idk man but 1thing for sure , he doesn't live and breathe handbook ... let alone man pages .
@TheOriginalEvanium
7 ай бұрын
It's all preference of course. On desktop, Linux suits the needs of many much better. Especially since I tend to use newer hardware and technologies. But I still prefer FreeBSD for my servers.
@kittenzrulz2314
9 ай бұрын
I'll adress your points and make counterpoints 1. Almost all established Linux distros have comprehensive documentation 2. If you want universal Linux packages then Flatpak exists, meanwhile separate repos exist for a reason. If you want updates as soon as they release there are bleeding edge distros like Arch, alternatively there are more stable distros like Debian and Fedora. 3. The BSD license is the reason why it has not and will never become popular. On Linux you're free to take code and use it as you wish granted you do the bare minimum of giving back to the community by letting others use your code. Because of this code is developed on top of other code leading to a thriving community. Meanwhile on BSD massive corporations simply take code and contribute the minimal amount if any at all. The second biggest OS (MacOS) is based on BSD and yet their success has not led to anything positive for BSD. Meanwhile Linux has several advantages that you didnt mention 1. Becouse Linux isnt centralized there are tons of options for everything and developers are more willing to experiment 2. More people use it leading to more contributors and maintainers 3. There are many OEMs that support Linux like System76, Tuxedo, Framework, Dell*, HP*, Lenovo*, and many more (*depends on the model). Meanwhile no laptop is even optimized for BSD (at least not any I can think of). 4. Linux distros and software often receive tons of money from companies and other organizations. Some distros like OpenSuse, Fedora, Pop_OS, and Ubuntu receive direct funding from companies.
@jordanhubbard
9 ай бұрын
I don't think much purpose would be served in doing a point / counterpoint loop on everything this video says and how various Linux fans are going to attempt to refute them one by one, but I do want to dispute (strongly) point #3: The BSD license. What you present is a rather one-dimensional view of how software licenses work in general, how companies are incentivized to contribute to open source, how effective the carrot vs stick approach is in practice, and whether all contributions need take the form of source code modifications. First, the GPL is hardly the only example of a successful license, as your text implies. The BSD license has been unquestionably successful for many decades now (and you can read some of the reasons why we think so in the FreeBSD documentation), but to sum it up: We always wanted, first and foremost, for our software to be USED. To make our software USEFUL. That is a KPI that powers so much of the contributions that are still flowing into *BSD today. People are more than welcome to have other goals, of course, but that has always been a key one "ours" and, if you think about it, the goals of academia are very similar: Readers and citations! Impact and influence of the research being done!). The Apache license, and the accompanying Apache Software Foundation, have also been highly successful (one might say *extremely* successful) and are very similar in tone and spirit. The MIT license? It's part of every X server and fundamental X client library powering both desktop and embedded UIs, and it's just as liberal and non-restrictive. I could go on, but I think the point is made. Second, anyone who lives in a capitalist country fully understands the need to work to support their families. Many of the companies you mentioned who "inherited" or acquired (as in NeXTStep) technology from BSD also hired a lot of BSD engineers over the years. Changes were contributed back, too, even though you may not have noticed, but I think giving the many volunteers who spent so many hours donating their time some commercial work directly related to their contributions was even more appreciated. The same happens in the Linux community via the commercial distributions you mentioned, so it's really a distinction without a difference. Third, and finally, software being GPL'd is *no* assurance that the derived works will be provided back in any usable form. First, a company has to be caught violating the "internal use only" clause of the GPL. Second, the community needs to somehow "force" this company to do the right thing, which would be to both release their code and make it something capable of being merged rather than represent some ancient fork of files that don't even build. I have seen that happen dozens of times, it's not even remotely far-fetched, and the end result is essentially what we already knew: You can't bludgeon people into cooperating. You'll get, at best, "malicious compliance" from that approach. I think it's important that people understand these distinctions because they're important. jkh out!
@sofiaknyazeva
9 ай бұрын
Now let me make counterpoints of your counterpoints. > 1. Almost all established Linux distros have comprehensive documentation Can you tell me which one GNU/Linux distro is properly "established"? I've seen lots of TODO, outdated, broken, and even out-of-context docs in Debian. Fedora? That's a corporate distro. They let us test Fedora which will eventually benefit RedHat. > 2. If you want universal Linux packages then Flatpak exists, meanwhile separate repos exist for a reason. If you want updates as soon as they release there are bleeding edge distros like Arch, alternatively there are more stable distros like Debian and Fedora. Flatpak is dogshit. For whatever purpose, it will download tons of useless packages, and even worse for each package. This is a way to make the system even more bloated than anyone could ever imagine. BSDs don't have a universal package manager, and each BSD variant has its version. I'm not sure what he was talking about on this. > 3. The BSD license is the reason why it has not and will never become popular. On Linux you're free to take code and use it as you wish granted you do the bare minimum of giving back to the community by letting others use your code. Because of this code is developed on top of other code leading to a thriving community. Meanwhile, on BSD massive corporations simply take code and contribute a minimal amount if any at all. The second biggest OS (MacOS) is based on BSD and yet their success has not led to anything positive for BSD. This is incorrect. GPL never explicitly states that "changes must need to be open source no matter what", only if it's distributed, otherwise it's not required. GPL is an extremely terrible license when you're developing something and you need shared libraries alas, they are GPL licensed and it means that your code has to use a GPL license if you use theirs. BSD other hand is a permissive license. Sure the development may not be as same as GNU/Linux but it does not mean that nobody contributes. Netflix (kernel stack), Apple (network and compiler stack), Microsoft, and Google contribute to FreeBSD as well. Companies that utilize FreeBSD more, contribute more. That's how it works. Also, macOS isn't completely "based" on BSD or even FreeBSD. macOS uses a kernel called XNU (X Not Unix) and it has no relationship with BSD. What macOS shares with BSD is the userland utilities, the network stack, and libc (shared between Free, Open, and NetBSD). Please don't make comments that's just solely invalid. Also, I'm not saying that the author of this video is correct in any sense.
@arampak
9 ай бұрын
Let me share the experience of the person who run a division in a large private software company. My division has produced several products that had to utilize components coming with different licences. The easiest were BSD, MIT and alike, because they all were permissive. GPT licences were a real pain, especially GPL3. When using them, we needed to separate from the other code and use as-is, so that we don't end up violating the GPL. It was also about making sure that the paperwork is done correctly all along, including the end-user licences. As to the contribution, we provided all the bug fixes and enhancements back as much as we could to all the open-source software we used, and we open-sourced some of our software as well, because we needed to support the code going forward, and it would be much more efficient to utilize the community support. Integrating back all of our patches and changes into every major update of the original code was and is a big trouble, that just made no sense.
@AntranigVartanian
9 ай бұрын
"Almost all established Linux distros have comprehensive documentation" BUHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHA whaatt?? Arch and Gentoo, that's pretty much it.
@nerdycatgamer
8 ай бұрын
I'm also a Linux user, but I think you're very much wrong. First of all, even though this video is (some what clickbaitingly) titled "Why FreeBSD is Better Than Linux", it's not really an argument of which is better; he's just giving some of the pros of FreeBSD and why someone might prefer it over Linux. There's no need to 'debunk' any of his points. I think his first point is the strongest. As a programmer, FreeBSD's documentation seems like a dream compared to Linux. The fact that I'm expected to read the Arch Wiki (requiring an internet connection), and that every holds the wiki up as this perfect resource is so absurd. Just having a manual packaged with the operating system is so much more intelligent and usable. The Arch wiki is one of the best and most extensive pieces of documentation for a Linux distro and it is not as good as people act like it is, not even close.
@exception05
22 күн бұрын
FreeBSD user: "Problems with hardware compatibility..." Hackintosh user: "Hold my beer"
@kehindeakiode2865
8 ай бұрын
Small correction: Linux isn't Unix at all (although inspired by it) while FreeBSD actually is Unix, but cannot be called that because of historical copyright reasons. BSD (Berkeley Standard Distribution) was the version of Unix developed at UCLA Berkeley several years ago and is the ancestor of all BSD variants.
@TexasTrucker-nx8dd
8 ай бұрын
1974 was a few years ago?
@luciusirving5926
6 ай бұрын
Wrong! BSD is just BSD, an OS of its own. True Unix was commercialware and far from alt-tech. Everyone knows that modern BSD is unix-like and alt-tech, but still original.
@encycl07pedia-
2 ай бұрын
I love how you typed "UCLA Berkeley" and didn't see a problem with it.
@cbbcbb6803
9 ай бұрын
Documentation that is readable and usable is worth switching. I would like the BSD license to be a little more restrictive by granting exclusive use and ownership of customized modifications for a limited time period, maybe for several years.
@homeopathicfossil-fuels4789
8 ай бұрын
as far as I know it also didnt get rust pushed into the kernel, which is what attracts me
@mchi2214
5 ай бұрын
Are you winning son?
@josmoify
5 ай бұрын
t480 seems to be able to handle just about any linux or bsd distro.
@ArmchairRamb0
8 ай бұрын
Good video. I'm going to try it in VirtualBox, I wonder if it's supported.
@jedahn
5 ай бұрын
Worked for me.
@BlueRidgeCritter
Ай бұрын
I would love to see FreeBSD catch up, but it is still pretty far behind linux in times of hardware support and modern needs. I like to work with it because it is stable, but over the past few years, linux stability has improved a lot more as well. I think for the average day to day user, linux is still the os to beat. And I am not a fanboy, I started with Unix 30 years ago, have done IT with windows of various flavors, and have been using linux since the late 90s. I keep pulling for FreeBSD and the other unix-like variants, though!
@jgarbo3541
8 ай бұрын
You need an instruction from the maintainer to install a package? If it's so hard, make it a .deb package - still problems - apt install -f will fix it.
@seedney
7 ай бұрын
…and you end up with package not functioning as expected.
@seditiouswalrus
9 ай бұрын
Freebsd has its use cases, the desktop is NOT one of them.
@ngtube9
9 ай бұрын
Sorry, but I use FreeBSD on my PCs and laptops (and on servers). I installed Ubuntu, Debian and CentOS on Laptop or Server's - Nice, but no really benefit - beside docker, which is bloated too much... Cheers, Norbert
@trajectoryunown
9 ай бұрын
@@ngtube9 How's it handle gaming in comparison to Linux? Currently, the big problem on Linux only has to do with trash anti-cheats, but it's solid otherwise. Also, how are packages handled? I've only had experience with BSD through OPNSense, and I _really_ don't want to have to learn a whole new system from scratch.
@ngtube9
9 ай бұрын
You are right in some ways. Linux has its strength. I do not Play games. This has many years passed. But I like the simplicity and simple design of bsd. And it is stable. Yes, i need more Background knowledge. And sometimes more... all the best, Norbert
@seditiouswalrus
9 ай бұрын
@@ngtube9 Don't get me wrong NOT knocking BSD here it is a powerful OS, but running it as a desktop is like getting a migraine with out having meds. If you want to do normal everyday things get ready for a slew of research and workarounds. Though I do agree if you put in the time, it is very stable and highly reliable.
@hi2chan
9 ай бұрын
FreeBSD is made for desktop
@mentalplayground
9 ай бұрын
I run Debian for years, FreeBSD is only playground I never used it in production. Case of old habbits.
@TexasTrucker-nx8dd
8 ай бұрын
Ironic that you mention that since BSD is the base operating system for core architecture network and server components because of its security and reliability.
@mentalplayground
8 ай бұрын
@@TexasTrucker-nx8dd Yea, I meant my old habits.
@seedney
7 ай бұрын
And you don’t have pfsense or something that is build on top of FreeBSD?
@mentalplayground
7 ай бұрын
@@seedneyWe do not have any BSD, decision made way about my paygrade. On personal level I like TruNAS (BSD)
@seedney
7 ай бұрын
@@mentalplayground So why so many are using debian? What is so special about that distro? Why not Slackware or Gentoo?
@jgarbo3541
8 ай бұрын
You've been up in the North-West Frontier too long. Missed a few things.
@luciusirving5926
6 ай бұрын
BSD and GNU/Linux are alt-tech in their own ways. Both operating systems are also original. They both have their respective purposes.
@Skiggles
8 ай бұрын
It is interesting to me that you titled this with why FreeBSD is better than Linux, yet you mention that they have a linux compatability layer for software that does not run natively in the first minute of the video lol. You sure it's better? Then at the end, you concede that some hardware is not supported on FreeBSD which "reminded you of Linux 10 years ago". Doesn't sound better to me.
@mchi2214
6 ай бұрын
lol well said.
@martinrascon1350
5 ай бұрын
Due to Planned Obsolesence we have to go back to programming our bsd system to what we want to have a good system
@damianateiro
7 ай бұрын
He uses Windows and says that freebsd is better than Linux xd. Any relatively large distro has a wiki/manual equal to or better than any BSD; The GPL license is better than the BSD because it protects the developer from having their work stolen since whoever makes a fork has to do it at least open source, not like mac os which contributes nothing or almost nothing to freebsd; and if freebsd or BSDs in general were better than Linux they would not have to depend so much on Linux for applications or drivers
@agiledevart
7 ай бұрын
Maybe you will like this one more kzitem.info/news/bejne/uYKiqGd7rKeGaKQsi=R5oejS9XzvaXPxUx
@henrymoss2366
2 ай бұрын
The problem with BSD "users" is the enormous amount of shit they talk. Use a BSD is like going back to the MS-DOS era, even a manual distribution like Slackware is much better than any BSD. FeeeBSD developers use macOS to develop FreeBSD 😂 and they are the free bitches for companies like Apple, Sony, Netflix, among others. The BSD license is bullshit for naive idiots. GPL, as you said, protects the developers and also the community.
@encycl07pedia-
2 ай бұрын
You have to own something for it to be stolen. GPL is basically a lack of ownership when it comes to software, which isn't inherently right or wrong. Saying GNU/Linux is better than BSD just because it has more compatibility with applications and drivers is like saying Windows is better than GNU/Linux because it has better compatibility with applications and drivers. In my experience, BSD has a friendlier community, too. I say that a GNU/Linux user. XD only works when it's in caps, BTW.
@henrymoss2366
2 ай бұрын
@@encycl07pedia- Windows isn't a Unix-like system, so it doesn't enter the equation. GNU/Linux is superior to all BSD not only 'cause it has more hardware compatibility and many applications (although that is a plus), but because it has defeated all BSD in its own territory. The GPL isn't perfect, but it follows the basic principles of social collaboration, while the BSD license is the license of the naive who is beaten by his boss and continues to flatter him and work for the tyrant. Lastly, the BSD communities are toxic, I was there in the forums, IRC, etc., and each BSD goes its own way and they don't get along with each other. BSD is a family of zombie operating systems, which at some point had their moment of glory, but that has faded and died, now they only live to criticize GNU/Linux and have an obsession with being Unix, while GNU/Linux continues to advance and is the undisputed leader in high performance computing and most of the Internet infrastructure is based on GNU/Linux. ;-)
@encycl07pedia-
2 ай бұрын
@@henrymoss2366 lol. Cope harder. Most of that post applies to Windows being better than GNU/Linux or applies to GNU/Linux distros/communities. I've been solo-booting Debian-based distributions for around 7 years now. I've never really had a chance to use BSD outside of a VM.
@joaopauloalbq
9 ай бұрын
The only thing BSD is better than Linux is to close the source code :v
@JoeyGarcia
8 ай бұрын
That's about as free as you can get. No strings attached freedom!
@kittenzrulz2314
7 ай бұрын
@@JoeyGarcia In reality that means no strings attached freedom for major corporations, that freedom doesn't extend beyond that.
@JoeyGarcia
7 ай бұрын
@@kittenzrulz2314 That makes absolutely no sense. That freedom is for all. Individuals, corporations, aliens, even freaking Bigfoot. Keep it open, close it up, print it out on paper and burn it in your fireplace. The developers DO NOT CARE! It's completely free to do whatever you want for the betterment of software projects open or closed. Or betterment if fireplaces. LOL
@happygofishing
7 ай бұрын
What good is freedom if it gives power to demonic globo corporations?@@JoeyGarcia
@mattseaton5832
6 ай бұрын
@@kittenzrulz2314 Waaaahhhhh. Somebody might turn a profit one day! The horror! Profits should be banned!
@JanuszKrysztofiak
3 ай бұрын
Meh. Last time I checked, FreeBSD did not even support GPU (Intel ARC) in my desktop. From what I have heard, it would struggle with wifi in my laptop. Linux handles both flawlessly. My work involves docker containers too. I also like the ease systemd (BTW, systemd was inspired by macOS launchd) allows me to define user-services and the standarization across distros it brings. Moreover, I use Linux USB gadget mode on my RPis Zero (of BSDs, only FreeBSD has something similar, but much more limited in comparison to Linux and not sure it is supported at all on RPIs). There is some gaming on Steam too. I see little reasons to prefer BSDs over Linux unless you are a company taking an advantage of the more liberal source code licence or some very particular needs. For a Linux user, BSDs feel like a time travel to the era where hardware support on Linux was very patchy and the general software support was weaker. Having BSDs is good to not land in a complete monoculture, but their 'superiority' is very debatable at best. I tried FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD on VMs. Of the three: FreeBSD had most features, OpenBSD felt easiest and NetBSD was the most buggy. All three suck as desktops.
@mohamad20zx34
9 ай бұрын
hey can we use freebsd daily on our pcs without losing our data
@TexasTrucker-nx8dd
8 ай бұрын
FreeBSD is designed to delete your whole filesystem as soon as you power it off.
@mohamad20zx34
8 ай бұрын
@@TexasTrucker-nx8dd OK I will stick to Linux
@NitroNilz
7 ай бұрын
Of course! 😂 You CAN set it up to "loose all data" if you want too. It has a sofisticated file system called ZFS which is extremely good at keeping your data safe. Much more integrated into the kernel than on Linux distroes ( because of licensing). [Edited]
@mohamad20zx34
7 ай бұрын
@@NitroNilz but I hate windows and I don't have time to try Mac os for most of my tasks
@_M_a_r_t_i_n_M
2 ай бұрын
Well this video succinctly explains exactly why FreeBSD is _not_ for me. And that I actually _am_ best off to keep running Windows as my primary OS because Visual Studio, and Linux distros for my secondary and hobby machines. There are legal legit ways to simply not pay the full ~300$ for Win 11 Pro. And on that note, it actually has MANY upsides to a Linux build for my personal needs as well as wants/likes/preferences.
@EasyGameEh
2 ай бұрын
chances of it werking are 50/50, but you only get them 10% of time.
@soulstenance
9 ай бұрын
This is interesting. I've tried GhostBSD which seems basically like the Linux Mint/Ubuntu/Manjaro of FreeBSD. Really pretty and easy to use, at least in terms of BSD OSs. That said I was never able to install it on real hardware as the installer would not allow me to install a bootloader, which is a fairly crucial part of any OS. It's a cool project but needs more support, both financial and development, to go head to head with Linux. At a minimum, we need solid ext4 support out of the box for me to consider using it daily as all my drives, aside from the odd thumbstick are formatted ext4. I will never touch NTFS or FAT again unless absolutely necessary (not even sure if BSD supports NTFS).
@tylerdean980
9 ай бұрын
If you're interested in FreeBSD the install always works and there's the desktop-installer package that lets you pick from a variety of desktops to install, I used desktop-installer to get KDE up and running
@soulstenance
9 ай бұрын
@@tylerdean980Thanks! Maybe I did it wrong but I tried vanilla FreeBSD in a VM and it certainly wasn't smooth sailing - similar to, maybe even harder than installing Arch. I finally got the DE up and running - I think it was Lumina - but it didn't feel nearly as fleshed out as a Linux install.
@tylerdean980
9 ай бұрын
@@soulstenance it takes some getting used to, it's not as big a transition from windows to Linux as Linux to BSD, but it's a different OS, lot of re learning to do, but rewarding. I don't think it's as fleshed out as Linux either, but it's fun to play with and good to have a backup if anything ever happens to Linux
@soulstenance
9 ай бұрын
@@tylerdean980 Wholeheartedly agree. It's Unix based so there'll be many similarities. It's a really cool project. My heart will probably break if anything happens to Linux though. Debian and Arch will probably be around forever simply because of the massive communities behind them. I use LMDE now so I should be safe if say, Ubuntu flies completely off the rails.
@fge00
5 ай бұрын
For a while there was Devil Bsd . It had potential but then it just disappeared
@Mantikal
3 ай бұрын
Another flavor (or Distro) of UNIX
@AristoKatClaude
8 ай бұрын
none of the reasons are good enough documentation?? check arch wiki or gentoo documentation very detailed and just as awesome source? linux has more software than bsd. hands down. hardwaare compatibility: oh boy linux runs on modems, toaster, and on potatos licence: seriously? as long as it's FOSS its good enough for most of the users
@agiledevart
8 ай бұрын
Check out my reasons why linux is better: kzitem.info/news/bejne/uYKiqGd7rKeGaKQ
@michaelz.7842
4 ай бұрын
I love FreeBSD
@tomyyoung2624
9 ай бұрын
Yes Sure If You’ll Be Approved?
@MatrixMaverick1980
8 ай бұрын
If my stuffs not working, I’m not using…
@elalemanpaisa
6 ай бұрын
Linux Is not Unix it's not even posix compliant
@theperfectionist1607
5 ай бұрын
sadly
@callisoncaffrey
3 ай бұрын
Not accurate. Depends on the packet manager if you get extra information. Portage gives you a lot, while Zypper gives you some. The rest don't give you any, but then I very rarely actually needed addition information. I'm pretty sure the Archwiki works for all systemd distros. Also not accurate. Most applications are developed with systemd in mind, which is a blight on most distros. So you don't have that problem either. Seriously, you are just making shit up at this point. I see no reason to use FreeBSD. If you want security and stability, you go with OpenBSD, which I run on my main box, for everything else you use Linux. Also you forgot to mention that pf is shit. Both iptables and nft are the bomb in comparison.
@guestsneezeplayz
Ай бұрын
Arch Linux >> BSD
@ItaloPenna
6 ай бұрын
Nice vídeo.
@MakeLinuxSimple
8 ай бұрын
Hi you remove my perfectly polite comment with some technical counterpoints and rectification few parts of your opinion. Bravo, very mature behawior. Your credibility as tech youtuber just skyrocket thru the roof.
@slycordinator
3 ай бұрын
"Applications on FreeBSD are developed for FreeBSD only. Applications on BSD are called ports" None of that is true. If you don't install the Ports Collection, you'll still have plenty of applications; you'd have all of them that are included in base FreeBSD. As well, most of the things in the Ports Collection were developed for any old Unix, not specifically FreeBSD. For instance, you have a screenshot of the documentation for installing Xorg, which is absolutely not "developed for FreeBSD".
@jgaming2069
4 ай бұрын
Naw 😂
@gdotone1
2 ай бұрын
linux is not unix linux is a hack
@BlueRidgeCritter
Ай бұрын
That's nitpicking, but since you brought it up: (Free, Net, Open, etc) BSDs aren't unix either. In fact, FreeBSD would likely have gotten ahead of linux years ago, if it hadn't gotten into the legal battles over actual inix code, and had to rewrite it so that it WASN'T unix. And, they are ALL hacks. That's the whole point.
@gdotone1
Ай бұрын
@@BlueRidgeCritter actually Mac OS is unix
@BlueRidgeCritter
Ай бұрын
@@gdotone1it has some FreeBSD, so yes it is based on it, but not completely. Enough that I've been able to use that fact a few times to save some OSX systems. And I still have a copy of Darwin running around here somewhere. But anyway, to your point, FreeBSD is not Unix, so neither is OSX. 😂
@ogreunderbridge5204
8 ай бұрын
Maybe time is due to put my toe back in the water just to check out the bathing temperature... :)) If we can agree to not mention "Wine" as a viable alternative, as it outside serving just gaming and similar softwares, is not; Has anyone made an alternative OS yet, that fully can replace Windows, as an OS capable to platform 3rd ware softwares intended to operate in Windows ? As in -"F.U. Bill !", just to spell it out...
Пікірлер: 180