The most important core point of Unix vs No-Unix is Unix-Philosophy.
I totally and completely fully agree with UP uncontradicted.
Because if you want the best, that's the way to do it.
FreeBSD follows UP completely,
Linux partially.
UP was defined by people who gave the whole thing a very good thought.
One of UP's cores is modularity.
Modularity is not for Unix or operating systems only. It's systematic.
Modularity is global, fundamental core rule of solid engineering.
Modularity is something all agree with immediatly, because it sounds reasonable and promises high quality results.
You can sell things by writing "modular" on it.
And then something else is done or bought.
Modularity is not only a technical term, sounding good and reasonable, because it promises adaptivity, flexibility, efficiency and more.
Modularity also means:
1. Effort. You need to search, find, chose and decide what modules you need and install them. You need to organize the modules.
2. Restriction (modesty). You have to be satisfied with you only get all you want and all you need.
Today's people are so used to always get way more superfluid stuff as they asked for, that they are disapointed if they only get what they ordered, and cannot deal with it, if someone complains to received things didn't asked for.
"But everybody else..."
The majority are morons, cattle, silently nodding anything through you present them.
I don't care what "everybody else....".
I know what I want, and what I don't want.
Most who would sit at my machine would complain:
"Looks boring. Nothing on it. Empty. Spartan. Old fashioned...."
Well, it's
defined by me for me and reduced to
my needs.
All I need it's there. It's reduced to it's core.
I only potter with something if I need it or want something new.
Coming from Windows, over the years I "downgraded" from LXDE over xfce to fvwm2. [I was no Gnome-type-user and I always disliked KDE]
With fvwm2 I finally can do what I could not do with any other I used before:
I can tailor my desktop
exactly the way I want it to.
I don't care much about modes and how window decorations look [funny thing: the look currently modern as "plain and clear" 20 years ago would be blamed as "ugly, primitive, incapable"
]
If I need a red alarm-knob I give it a good design.
And then bother about other things.
But (software)world is full of people arguing:
"Let's make it triangle shaped!" - "round!" - "square!" - "ROUND!!" - "...what about to make it blue or green? Red is so old-school...."
This was my way top-down.
But this also ain't UP.
Starting with everything and then throw all over board you don't want and ignore what you don't need, but lug it around anyway is the opposite of efficient.
UP - modularity, efficiency - means bottom-up.
Start blank and then add (only) what you need and want.
So a turnkey OS with a complete, predefined Desktop Environment is not UP.
It can't.
Because all decisions and selections about the modules are already chosen, and not by the user.
This ain't no problem, because for the majority this is best.
But we need to preserve diversity.
Life needs evolution, and evolution needs diversity.
Keeping individual styles is a very comfortable bonus included for free.
Modularity is most efficient to realize diversity.
Thus:
Don't understimate Unix Philosophy.
Don't take it lightly as marketing slogan, only.
Keep it more than some wise words.
Live it!
Use FreeBSD!