Linux to BSD

mooreted · Sep 5, 2009

I have been using Linux for 8 or 9 years. I tried FreeBSD several years ago, but it didn't seem like a good OS for a regular desktop user. I would like to try it again, but have a few concerns:

a. Could I play Second Life with it?
b. Can I install drivers for an 8800GT and get full speed?
c. Can I play movies, DVD's, music flash videos, etc.?

Essentially, can I do all the things I do on Linux with FreeBSD or will I find that it's lacking a lot of the things a normal user would want to do?

dennylin93 · Sep 5, 2009

No idea, but there is Wine for Windows emulation. Linux emulation also works.
There are ports of Nvidia drivers (x11/nvidia-driver), so the graphic cards should work fine.
Yes, DVDs, movies, and videos can all be played.

Just pick i386 instead of amd64 since Wine and the Nvidia only work on i386. Support for amd64 should come in later releases.

Most applications that run on Linux also work on FreeBSD. GNOME, KDE, Xfce, OpenOffice.org, Firefox, etc. They just need to be installed.

It's a different concept. Linux stuffs your system with a lot of useless stuff by default while FreeBSD just installs the base system. Users are free to decide what they wish to install later. It does take more time, but it leaves a greater room for customization.

There's always PC-BSD for those who want to use BSD but are too lazy to install all the necessary ports for a desktop.

mooreted · Sep 5, 2009

That depends on the distro. Slackware and Archlinux, for instance, do not install anything you don't want. The bigger distros are trying to cater to "Joe Sixpack" for some strange reason.

Anyway, I have run into one problem: no guest additions for FreeBSD as a guest in Virtualbox. It makes me wonder how much is out there that is only made for Linux. It seems like the BSD's lag behind Linux when it comes to the desktop.

I guess I'll see what I can do in VB before I decide to actually switch.

I know the big distros are not catering to someone like me. Pulseaudio installed without my consent, for instance. Hundreds of apps installed that I'll never use. I would like something cleaner.

CodeBlock · Sep 5, 2009

Few things:
1) The nvidia driver currently works for non-64-bit machines. Been there, tried that, and am currently losing about a gig of my 4gb /ram, on my desktop, due to having to run 32-bit.

2) Some driver stuff (UVC Webcam driver, for example) doesn't work on BSD, so for example, on my laptop install, I can not use my webcam. This is a bit of a disappointment, but the positive aspects of FreeBSD overwhelmingly outweigh the need for this.

3) Flash is a bit unstable/evil. It runs in the Linux compatibility layer, and while I'm not sure this is the issue, I think that if/when Adobe makes us a native flash player, this will be fixed.

4) VirtualBox *does* work with a BSD host, but acts up a bit. It is a very new project in the BSD community, and I expect to see it improve. I'd like to possibly even get involved and help test some stuff, and be a part of making this work for everyone, that would be pretty neat.

Overall the positive stuff that comes with BSD (The community, Ports, Documentation, etc, etc) really make BSD the great OS that it is. Without all the developers, users, PR-submitters, Committers, etc.. BSD would not be what it is. Keep that in mind

.

dennylin93 · Sep 5, 2009

mooreted said:
That depends on the distro. Slackware and Archlinux, for instance, do not install anything you don't want.

Oops. I forgot about Slackware, Arch, and Gentoo.

Flash is a bit unstable/evil. It runs in the Linux compatibility layer, and while I'm not sure this is the issue, I think that if/when Adobe makes us a native flash player, this will be fixed.

Flash seems to work fine for me (using www/linux-f10-flashplugin10). I haven't really run into problems yet.

I'd say that FreeBSD does make a fine desktop. There are some limitations, but it doesn't lag behind Linux a lot. There aren't a lot of programs that can run on Linux but not on FreeBSD (there are over 20000 ports available right now).

CodeBlock · Sep 5, 2009

dennylin93 said:
Oops. I forgot about Slackware, Arch, and Gentoo.

Flash seems to work fine for me (using www/linux-f10-flashplugin10). I haven't really run into problems yet.

I'd say that FreeBSD does make a fine desktop. There are some limitations, but it doesn't lag behind Linux a lot. There aren't a lot of programs that can run on Linux but not on FreeBSD (there are over 20000 ports available right now).

Right, and I agree with this, but for a while, flash10 was...non-trivial to set up, and every now and then I have to `killall npviewer.bin`... I still blame that on adobe

dennylin93 · Sep 5, 2009

CodeBlock said:
Right, and I agree with this, but for a while, flash10 was...non-trivial to set up, and every now and then I have to `killall npviewer.bin`... I still blame that on adobe

I even have a script for $ killall npviewer.bin

. Every time I need it, I just type $ killall-flash.sh.

SirDice · Sep 5, 2009

Try not to use killall. If you're ever on Solaris killall does something completely different. Use pgrep(1) and pkill(1).

CodeBlock · Sep 5, 2009

hah, alias time! `kf` (kill flash) or similar

...
I know - the alias stinks, then again I have `pfu` for `portsnap fetch update`, and `pb` for `portmaster -Bad`

Ole · Sep 5, 2009

Also 'hot' key is good way for killing nspluginwrrapper

On AMD64, you can try x11-drivers/xf86-video-nouveau port for NVIDIA. Its get good speed for me

CodeBlock · Sep 5, 2009

Ole said:
Also 'hot' key is good way for killing nspluginwrrapper

On AMD64, you can try x11-drivers/xf86-video-nouveau port for NVIDIA. Its get good speed for me

Yeah I might make a ctrl-<something> hotkey or something, but my standard media keys do not work with BSD

.

Regarding the amd64, I couldn't get that to work with mine, but I didn't mess with it that much... Maybe when 8.0 comes out, I'll just do a fresh install and give it another shot. Or maybe Nvidia will give us a real driver for 64-bit by then

.

Beastie · Sep 5, 2009

CodeBlock said:
I think that if/when Adobe makes us a native flash player, this will be fixed.

Keep waiting. I somehow doubt the FreeBSD Foundation will waste big bucks on a native implementation any time soon. You better hope someday Flash is replaced altogether and "popular" websites make the switch.

CodeBlock said:
flash10 was...non-trivial to set up, and every now and then I have to `killall npviewer.bin`... I still blame that on adobe

It holds its name well. All those obscure proprietary binary blob crap should be boycotted. Most websites that rely on huge loads of javascripts, flash, and fancy animations to "look professional", are usually crap too anyway, they take ages to load and take all the fun from your browsing experience.

mooreted · Sep 6, 2009

CodeBlock said:
hah, alias time! `kf` (kill flash) or similar ...
I know - the alias stinks, then again I have `pfu` for `portsnap fetch update`, and `pb` for `portmaster -Bad`

What's wrong with aliases? I use them all the time. Makes life easier.

mooreted · Sep 6, 2009

Beastie said:
Keep waiting. I somehow doubt the FreeBSD Foundation will waste big bucks on a native implementation any time soon. You better hope someday Flash is replaced altogether and "popular" websites make the switch.

It holds its name well. All those obscure proprietary binary blob crap should be boycotted. Most websites that rely on huge loads of javascripts, flash, and fancy animations to "look professional", are usually crap too anyway, they take ages to load and take all the fun from your browsing experience.

Yeah, the web has gone to hell. When I need information I don't need flash and cool javascript popups and animated talking heads. I wish web designers would mellow out.

mooreted · Sep 6, 2009

Thanks for the replies. Always appreciated.

Eponasoft · Sep 9, 2009

mooreted said:
Yeah, the web has gone to hell. When I need information I don't need flash and cool javascript popups and animated talking heads. I wish web designers would mellow out.

I had an argument with someone about that a couple of months ago. He insisted that I should make all of my sites "Web 2.0 compliant!". So I said "you mean 3MB in size, filled with unneeded junk, that takes 2 minutes to load on broadband?". When I design a website, it loads very quickly because it isn't bogged down with crap; I rarely use javascript, preferring to stick with plain HTML (I don't even use XHTML; I find it a silly 'improvement' on a system that was never broken to begin with). I HATE Flash and refuse to use it for websites, not even for menus. KISS...Keep It Simple, Stupid!

fonz · Sep 9, 2009

Eponasoft said:
I had an argument with someone about that a couple of months ago. He insisted that I should make all of my sites "Web 2.0 compliant!". So I said "you mean 3MB in size, filled with unneeded junk, that takes 2 minutes to load on broadband?". When I design a website, it loads very quickly because it isn't bogged down with crap; I rarely use javascript, preferring to stick with plain HTML (I don't even use XHTML; I find it a silly 'improvement' on a system that was never broken to begin with). I HATE Flash and refuse to use it for websites, not even for menus. KISS...Keep It Simple, Stupid!

+1

Alphons

dennylin93 · Sep 9, 2009

A lot of websites in Taiwan are filled with horrible bits of HTML and JavaScript. I couldn't believe my own eyes at first. Some websites used JS for stuff that could be easily achieved by CSS. No accessibility as well. The list goes on and on.

vivek · Sep 9, 2009

Now, web is nothing but javascript, just take a look at gmail and other apps. If JS is disabled many site render to refuse.

dennylin93 · Sep 9, 2009

We've gone a bit off-topic for this thread.

mooreted · Sep 9, 2009

Eponasoft said:
I had an argument with someone about that a couple of months ago. He insisted that I should make all of my sites "Web 2.0 compliant!". So I said "you mean 3MB in size, filled with unneeded junk, that takes 2 minutes to load on broadband?". When I design a website, it loads very quickly because it isn't bogged down with crap; I rarely use javascript, preferring to stick with plain HTML (I don't even use XHTML; I find it a silly 'improvement' on a system that was never broken to begin with). I HATE Flash and refuse to use it for websites, not even for menus. KISS...Keep It Simple, Stupid!

Exactly. Too much unnecessary cruft out there.

mooreted · Sep 9, 2009

dennylin93 said:
We've gone a bit off-topic for this thread.

Oops.

hedwards · Sep 10, 2009

dennylin93 said:
We've gone a bit off-topic for this thread.

Eh, does that even apply to threadjacks which the OP participates?

As for the topic, the multimedia stuff tends to work pretty well on FreeBSD these days with a few exceptions. And while the nVidia support in the AMD64 version is basically non-existent at this point, there's been a lot of work, and it won't be that way forever.

Most of the differences between Linux and FreeBSD are the result of cultural disagreements, at least at the user level, in code that's not particularly true.

Bunyan · Sep 10, 2009

I don't agree that Linux stuffs your disc with unneeded packages. It depends on the distro. Great and mighty SLACKWARE doesn't fill your hard-drive with illogical dependencies. If you're an expert, you can cut the installation menu even more drastically and SLACKWARE will work!
SLACKWARE is the best conceived Linux distribution.

CodeBlock · Sep 10, 2009

Bunyan said:
I don't agree that Linux stuffs your disc with unneeded packages. It depends on the distro. Great and mighty SLACKWARE doesn't fill your hard-drive with illogical dependencies. If you're an expert, you can cut the installation menu even more drastically and SLACKWARE will work!
SLACKWARE is the best conceived Linux distribution.

That's debatable

Linux to BSD

Administrator