Seriously

Status
Not open for further replies.
Terry_Kennedy said:
Therefore I didn't look for any of the "sysinstall with ZFS" cookbook articles.
Click to expand...

The PC-BSD installer supports installing FreeBSD and includes some options missing from sysinstall such as support for ZFS filesystems.
 
rtobyr said:
I see where you are coming from. You don't see where I am coming from: Why do I need an alternative? Why can't FreeBSD have options for the masses?
Click to expand...

Usually I would begin with something along the lines of "FreeBSD is many things to many people" and then babble about the philosophy that sysadmins need no gui for their network appliances. Which is a fact. People need something vanilla to begin with which doesn't enforce bloat such as an unessential windowing system to run their services.

PC-BSD fills the need for the focusing on the desktop user vs FreeBSD's generic unix install. pfsense is also another product of this which enforces the user focused and direct choices on tools to use for firewalling, nat, routing and nas.

There is a new sysinstall being developed which I imagine will be nice for installing the OS.

What I would be interested in is a nice low level tool such as a live cd which boots into a pure command prompt. If sysinstall in any form is preferred the user can run it from there. If PC-bsd's installer a dvd version of the live cd could be there and started from the prompt with simply startx or some wrapper such as startdesktop-install.(install-desktop.sh?)

Of course the options for those who don't need sysinstall or don't care to install x-windows + desktop from gui or have no need for gui will have a third option to configure pre-installation tasks directly from the live environment.

Just an idea. I am perfectly content with the process it is now. There is a reason why FreeBSD does not force gui from the install or have a gui install itself. The reason is that x11 is a piece of software that we can install if we desire or need. Some of us simply don't need it. FreeBSD is not GNU and GNU is not UNIX. Nor is it a distro of all third party software wrapped around a kernel. It is a complete operating system which just so happens to give you the option to be a server, a client or both. Simply stated: it's all about choices and the freedom to make those choices without some distro forcing it's policy on you.

As for being more assessable to people new to open source operating systems. If you point out where it is not clear in the handbook on how to do these pre and post install tasks (such as install x11) I would be most interested in what comes off as being over ambiguous.
 
UNIXgod said:
What I would be interested in is a nice low level tool such as a live cd which boots into a pure command prompt.
Click to expand...

Frenzy, mfsBSD, and the bsdinstall CDs all do this already.

If sysinstall in any form is preferred the user can run it from there. If PC-bsd's installer a dvd version of the live cd could be there and started from the prompt with simply startx or some wrapper such as startdesktop-install.(install-desktop.sh?)
Click to expand...

Oh, you mean for an installation CD, where you can then choose your own installer UI. That's the goal of the bsdinstall/pc-sysinstall project(s): create a separate installer backend that can be managed from any frontend.

The goal is to have the "bsdinstall" TUI and the "PC-BSD installer" GUI both work using the same backend, scripted install setup. That way, those who want a point-n-click GUI can have one; and those who want a serial-console-friendly UI can have one; and those who want a purely scripted install can have one; and so on. All using the same installer code (possibly even on the same CD/DVD).
 
I have received lately some criticism on a recent review that I made on the new bsdinstaller.
Despite other people who hate the old sysinstall I happen to be a big fan of it. I like the fact that it gives me a quick and clear approach on what I want to install and where. I also like the fact that I can perform all my necessary post installation. But what I like most is the speed.

Having said that I must also admit that I never use sysinstall anymore. In fact I haven't used it for more than a year. Why? Because all installations that I perform use a GPT partitioning scheme with labels and half of them are root on ZFS based.

So, yes I was happy with the idea of a new installer. I thought that the new installer would give me all those features so that I don't need to boot from fix it anymore.

I was pleased to see that the new installer is not GUI based so that I can still use a serial console instead. I didn't see any option for a kickstart installation though. Nor did I see any option for a pure binary upgrade. It is true that most boxes are connected to the net but I would still like to have this option for a firewall. So, what exactly can we expect from a installer.

a) Pre installation
b) Installation / Upgrade
c) Post installation

All that bundled with the new features that we all begin to use plus speed.
 
Maybe I am just misunderstanding the information that is out there about the different BSD's. Everything I've read can be paraphrased as this:

NetBSD is designed for portability.
OpenBSD is designed for security.
FreeBSD is the general purpose BSD. It's good for end-users.
 
Those are just showing usage of the different BSD systems and mentioning PC-BSD as one of the varieties out there. Doesn't mean it's 'significant' or insignificant. The articles don't need changing.
 
rtobyr said:
Maybe I am just misunderstanding the information that is out there about the different BSD's. Everything I've read can be paraphrased as this:

NetBSD is designed for portability.
OpenBSD is designed for security.
FreeBSD is the general purpose BSD. It's good for end-users.
Click to expand...

PCBSD is FreeBSD with a GUI, good for end users that don't want to set up their own.
 
Those are just showing usage of the different BSD systems and mentioning PC-BSD as one of the varieties out there. Doesn't mean it's 'significant' or insignificant. The articles don't need changing.
Click to expand...

OK look: my point is this: if we want to make all BSD's more popular (dare I say it: more competitive with Linux), then we need to attract the lay-people. We therefore need to make it very plain to folks who are Googling/Wikipedia-ing about BSD's that PC-BSD is the beginner's BSD. The Ubuntu of BSD's if you'll forgive me for the awkward comparison. By the way, if you were posting after reading Wikipedia's "Comparison of BSD Operating Systems", then pay attention to the details: *I* edited that article to include PC-BSD seconds after my previous post. Look at the citation that is included in the PC-BSD section. It cites this very thread. Before my edit, PC-BSD was no more than a row in a table about BSD operating systems.

I say again: If you want BSD to be competitive with Linux, then the community MUST do a better job of promoting PC-BSD. If the masses can't use a product, then it's less successful. Canonical is running in the black. How many BSD projects can say that?
 
Oh, and to those of you who suggested that I do a better job of contributing, I have this to say to you:

1. Programming is only a hobby for me. I could not contribute anything that way.

2. I have had past employers donate money to open source products that we used; however, I now work in the public sector. Such a donation would be committing the crime of "Gift of Public Funds."

3. Wanting to contribute to the Open Source movement, I've asked in many forums what options are left. The only two answers: promote the product (which I've done by editing Wikipedia), or give constructive criticism that will help the product to become better (which is the purpose of this thread).
 
rtobyr said:
OK look: my point is this: if we want to make all BSD's more popular (dare I say it: more competitive with Linux), then we need to attract the lay-people...PC-BSD is the beginner's BSD. The Ubuntu of BSD's if you'll forgive me for the awkward comparison.
Click to expand...

I think we all understood what you said in the first post. BTW when I first heard of the PC-BSD project the first thing that came to mind was ubuntu's over simplification of end user xdesktop install and configuration now for BSD users. You may have misunderstood my explanation about what FreeBSD is.

As for competing with linux? Last time I checked FreeBSD was still top market share in the web server market. netcraft confirm?

as for the lay-people concept. There are already many open source projects available for for the average M$ windows user to get acclimated to UNIX. There are many tutorials that date back to DOS user era to convert skills to the shell.

If learning curve is an issue PC-BSD is a project to alleviate that. It is still left to the user( lay-people as you call them) to take the initiative upon themselves to better their computational skills through reading the handbook and utilising the system tools man pages. Of course this would also apply to any third party software, services, and tools they install as well.

This marketing thing kills me though. Do people really fantasize that there is war between linux and BSD? gnome and kde? vi and emacs? postgres and mysql? apache and lighttpd? postfix and qmail? etc.

If FreeBSD market share drops someone let me know so I can sell my shares early =)


phoenix said:
Frenzy, mfsBSD, and the bsdinstall CDs all do this already...
The goal is to have the "bsdinstall" TUI and the "PC-BSD installer" GUI both work using the same backend, scripted install setup. That way, those who want a point-n-click GUI can have one; and those who want a serial-console-friendly UI can have one; and those who want a purely scripted install can have one; and so on. All using the same installer code (possibly even on the same CD/DVD).
Click to expand...

downloading mfsBSD now. gonna play with frenzy later. Thank you for the heads up on the future of bsdinstall. Sounds like every end will be covered.
 
Difficult learning curve is both a blessing and a curse. It means you have to invest more time, but it also means that there are some barriers to entry for other people who would do the same thing.

I think a decade ago when I was a windows addict, I had a similar attitude to the TS. Other people would try and get me to use Linux, saying "It's so powerful, and so much better!". I'd try it and give up in frustration. But having now used Linux and Unix, I have to say that yes, both are more powerful than Windows. And FreeBSD has more in the way of reliability features than Linux.

I guess a few things I've learned about open source since then:
  1. If you really must have something and it doesn't exist yet, either do it yourself or pay for it to be done.
  2. With great power comes great learning curve.

Developers have invested the time in becoming familiar with how the systems work. They improve things because it suits them, or they are paid for it. Any additional (especially non-paid) development work is likely to come at the expense of them or their families. Suggesting that someone else does a lot of work for your benefit is a lot like standing in front of your house after a load of wood has been dropped off, saying to no one in particular "Geez, my house would look much prettier and increase the value of the properties on the street if it was split and packed away into my wood shed. I'm not much of a woodcutter myself..."

Potential ways I see that FreeBSD (or variant) will become an Ubuntu:
  1. A Mark Shuttleworth comes along and decides to do the same thing with FreeBSD. If you want to do this, first step is earn a big pile of cash. I'll let you figure out that one.
  2. You gift some of your salary (really, just time you have invested, the same way you are asking developers to donate their time which can just as easily be put towards earning themselves some money) towards what you want.
  3. Get better at programming, either as a hobby or as part of a job programming. Then make an impact yourself, leading by example. Probably in something like PC-BSD where it might be well received.
 
Dunno if someone mentioned that, but if someone do not like sysinstall/bsdinstall/manual way You can still use PC-BSD CD/DVD and their graphical QT installer to install plain FreeBSD, PC-BSD has such option from 8.0 if I recall correctly.
 
Linux is for people who hate Windows. FreeBSD is for people who love Unix. - William Shakespeare 1583

Sounds about right ;)

It seems that people are insulted when PC-BSD is suggested to them. Which is a little sad.

Sometimes for a desktop system it does not seem practical to manually set everything up and it might be useful to use PC-BSD's "sane" defaults.

Perhaps a thing to remember is that PC-BSD is still more technical and geeky than Mac OS X and some very smart and geeky people use that.
 
I also like that one (yes oftop ;p)

"What was the goal of the Linux community--to replace Windows? One can imagine higher aspirations."
Bill Joy
 
UNIXgod said:
As for competing with linux? Last time I checked FreeBSD was still top market share in the web server market. netcraft confirm?
Click to expand...

I was curious about this claim, and a bit dubious. I had a search and it doesn't seem like BSD has much of a market share compared to Linux and Windows, this wiki article uses multiple sources, all of which give a low market share to BSD:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems#Servers

I'd like to see BSD promoted as a server OS before worrying about how easy it is to install onto a desktop, a selfish view I'll admit ;)

cheers Andy.
 
What about DesktopBSD? Has that project stalled again? Of it and PC-BSD, I prefered it's approach. I see it's forums are down and last snapshot was December of 2010.
 
AndyUKG said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems#Servers
Click to expand...

Took just the first row:

Linux 63.7%
All UNIX 2.7%

Very funny. Those people seems to suggest Linux is not UNIX?

On the other hand, it starts with a sentence like this "Server market share of software sold through commercial channels can be measured by two methods..."

So it obviously does not even consider FreeBSD, which is not sold to anyone.

Also, according to "Security Space" all UNIX is BSD. Good one! :)

It is however true, that the number of FreeBSD desktops is small.

PS: This thread has already gone way off-topic.
 
Sigh, how many times do we have to go through this? Linux is not UNIX(tm). Nor is it even Unix. It's a Unix-clone, a work-alike, a wannabe. There is no code history with any Unix-like system. It's not even POSIX-compliant. There's a reason Linux is never lumped in with Unix stats.
 
I do not agree with OP on this subject, I hate easy to install systems. the easier something is to install the harder it is to configure and get a know-how of how the system works. When you substitute the intelligence of the user by mechanical/computerized systems you often end up with something that works but seldom work good or like you want it to, It is better to have a "clean" system that the user then configure for him/her self and get to know it while doing so.

There are a few systems out there that come with a play-and-go CD/DVD or pre-installed and they may be good to try out an OS. But they are terrible when you want to configure the system and use it as anything else then a desktop workstation. Often you end up with some strange bug in the system which takes forever to fix just because you don't know which configuration files you need to look in or which settings you need to look at.

I do believe that anyone who decide on having a go at FreeBSD know more then the average guy/gal out there. Most who try any *BSD should be comfortable with a command line and using the man [command] to get all the info they need. If that fails there are often good guides to find which tell you what you are doing while you use them.
 
rtobyr said:
OK look: my point is this: if we want to make all BSD's more popular (dare I say it: more competitive with Linux), then we need to attract the lay-people.
Click to expand...

Well, that is the point isn't it? Your goal stated above isn't a goal for the FreeBSD Project (AFAIK). It might be a goal for some people in the community, but so far it haven't made it to a goal for the FreeBSD Project.

And, IMHO, popularity for it's own sake shouldn't be a goal for FreeBSD either. Let everybody and their grandmother use Ubuntu / Windows / Android / whatever; if somebody wants to use FreeBSD, they'll have to learn it. Just my two cents.
 
If FreeBSD ever decides that popularity or being competitive is more important, I'll go back to using my Amiga 1200. Its bad enough they have to support GNU extensions to some programs (granted though they may be useful). That's the reason I switched to FreeBSD. They know whats 'more' important.

Plus there aren't 100's of different 'distros' that have their own way of doing things. There are a few derivatives that collaborate towards common goals but also have their own set of specific goals. If a new derivative of *BSD popped up every month like Linux distros do, I wouldn't be using it. Although I see PC-BSD as a good thing and a way to 'ease' people new to the system into it, I just hope it doesn't spark into a wildfire (if you get the meaning). I for one am glad *BSD is not as 'popular' as other systems. Popularity is a double-edged sword. </rant>

Sounds off topic but that's just my 0.02<insert currency symbol here>.

On topic:
Though I've never had problems or the need for what it does not provide, I do agree the installer needs to be updated. If you have been following then you know that it is being done. All good things come in time.
 
I am a complete n00b at FreeBSD; but I prefer it the way it was engineered. Ease of use and power rarely go together.

Why isn't everyone a world class athlete? Or cello player? Or martial artist?

Most people drive automatic transmission cars; but can they drive a track course in their automatic as well as they could in a manual?

If you need your computer to fulfill the average user's needs, you probably do not 'need' FreeBSD.

If you want advanced features, you need to train to be competent it their use.

At least that is what I tell myself before I go whining on the boards when I break something... :)

Thanks everyone for the help!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top