David Gewirtz said:New motto: For all of us who have lives, there’s Windows.
This is a rant. But I’m so angry and frustrated right now that you’re just going to have to live with the rant. And, for you Linux people, you who know it all and look down upon the people who don’t spend day and night breathing in the insane arcana of all the little fiddly bits that make up modern distros, I have this to say: I don’t have your kind of time.
I’ve had it. I’ve had it with all the patched together pieces and parts that all have to be just the right versions, with just the right dependencies, compiled in just the right way, during just the right phase of the moon, with just the right number of people tilting left at just the right time.
I’ve had it with all the different package managers. With some code distributed with one package manager and other code distributed with other package managers. With modules that can be downloaded on Ubuntu just by typing the sequence in the anemic how-to, but won’t work at all on CentOS or Fedora, because the repositories weren’t specified in just, exactly, EXACTLY, the right frickin’ order on the third Wednesday of the month.
DutchDaemon said:Great rant, and it does sum up many FreeBSD users' frustrations with Lunix as well.
Rest of rant: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/diy-it/wh...inux-server-and-im-moving-back-to-windows/245
frijsdijk said:Servers: Debian/Ubuntu
Desktop: Mint
Btw, a pitty actually why most can not just give a straight answer without bashing Linux. Of course most here will prefer BSD, but if BSD would have such a wide support for hardware and software as Linux did, there would be no Linux would there. Unfortunately we need Linux now and then, and if used the proper way, I think it runs good enough!
Simba7 said:Laptop - Windows 7 Ultimate with Gentoo, FreeBSD, and Ubuntu in VMs (Hey, it's an Asus G53SX with 24GB of RAM and 1.5TB of disk space)
Fair enough if you know what you're talking about, but you'd be surprised to see how many people are asking for things they don't need due to not knowing what they're doing (not understanding the problem rarely leads to a correct solution).Simba7 said:If I didn't need it, I WOULDN'T BE ASKING FOR IT.
+1 on that :hfluca1978 said:What a laptop! I would rather do a Linux/FreeBSD running Windows as virtual machine, eh eh.
calande said:Ubuntu even though I have been disappointed by the 11.x series...
gore said:Red Hat and Stable in the same Sentence? Wow.... And on a FreeBSD Unix Forum???? Wow!
nuxthrou said:...I would love the Debian based - is my #1. Redhat is my #2 and Freebsd is #3.
...Debian, because, the arrangement of the files and the structures are easy to determine and understand.
...Redhat would be the second because, they are fairly stable, regardless of the file structure.
...Freebsd because the file structures are uniquely challenging, and fairly tough when it comes with SMTP-relay Server role or smarthost role, DNS role, firewall role, and router role. though, this can be also configured on some other disto but freebbsd is really unique.
Crivens said:Why not? Stabillity is what you make of it
gore said:Well, yes, to an extent; But I've never seen someone use Windows ME as a Server for what I'm assuming, is that reason Heh. That and Oracle is on my crap list right now.