Solved Paid FreeBSD

[LibreQuest]

There are many topics on an interest for a FreeBSD based system with a heavy focus on graphical installer and choice of GUI/Desktop on install. Would those who are unable to develop this for themselves be willing to pay developers to do the work for them?

 

[SirDice]

That's quite the loaded poll you have.

 

[drhowarddrfine]

There is no neither selection, either. And I'm a poet and didn't know it.

 

[unitrunker]

Last night while attending a presentation on Remix (a javascript framework), I asked why the default generated project did not include a unit testing framework (as compared to React, for example). I was told the team behind Remix did not want to impose their own opinions onto others. I thought this a great answer.

I think the response to why FreeBSD does not include a GUI be default to be the same. Too many choices. We have the tools to build whatever GUI we want.

 

[LibreQuest]

I was thinking a product made by the foundation with paid devs that offers a lot of options on install not restricting to any specific configurations. And of course the option to use the base install without configuration. That would be the only decent option. Even if the current version was paid I would pay for it if it were for sale only. But I also donate.

I made this post to be rather sarcastic though. I think, as it is, freebsd is excellent.

I would be supportive of a foundation developed and maintained os modeled after the old mandrake install system method. I thought that was pretty well designed.

 

[LibreQuest]

Looks like the neither votes have won!

 

[beetreetime]

No. That money would be better used elsewhere in the project. I wouldn't be happy if I knew my donated money was going to stuff like that.

Installing one after the fact is pretty easy anyways.

 

[jjrabbit]

This is a tough poll. Doesn't do one thing and do it well mean we should stick to the server space? Personally I think no GUI means dominating the server space.

We could definitely expand our user base by having a solid desktop system but that might just attract a lot of stupid people.

What I'm saying is having a GUI (paid or unpaid) could be our downfall.

#NoWifiOnThisServer

 

[beetreetime]

but that might just attract a lot of stupid people.

Nailed it. Don't invite trouble.

Just have to look what happened with Linux and which is only going to get worse with Microsoft making a mess of Windows.

 

[LibreQuest]

No. That money would be better used elsewhere in the project. I wouldn't be happy if I knew my donated money was going to stuff like that.

Installing one after the fact is pretty easy anyways.

If this were a realistic scenario you wouldn't put your core people on it. It would be very user space level work that wouldn't even involve much with packaging. I think you would end up with stupid entry level users as that would be your market.

 

[ralphbsz]

If a GUI was added to FreeBSD, I would not use it. I don't care who pays for it to be added. If it's the foundation, I hope they don't waste their money on it, because in my opinion, there's more important stuff to do. That's why I clicked "neither".

 

[LibreQuest]

If a GUI was added to FreeBSD, I would not use it. I don't care who pays for it to be added. If it's the foundation, I hope they don't waste their money on it, because in my opinion, there's more important stuff to do. That's why I clicked "neither".

I was thinking an installer with an option to add GUI during the install process not forcing a GUI onto a system install. That would just be tasteless. I agree with your sentiment though.

 

[patmaddox]

Doesn't do one thing and do it well mean we should stick to the server space?

Not even close. I think it means creating a reliable operating system upon which to run software e.g. nginx, postgres, i3wm, or Firefox.

I know it can be a bit of effort to put together a working system, and you’re going to have to sacrifice cutting-edge hardware to do so… but my laptop and workstation both run FreeBSD and it’s awesome.

We could definitely expand our user base by having a solid desktop system but that might just attract a lot of stupid people.

We already have a solid desktop system. In fact we have many options for composing one.

Improving the experience might also attract people who share FreeBSD’s values and contribute to the community, documentation, ports tree, and/or base.

 

[bgroper]

In past days I setup a fresh 14.x-RELEASE on some previously used hardwares.
The desktop-install package worked as intended to install sddm amd KDE/plasma, and a selection of other GUI packages.
The whole process took some serious (unattended) time to download and install, but was better experience than doing it all manually.
Not much fiddling to get an old nvidia (fanless and silent) card working with dual monitors.
YMMV

 

[jjrabbit]

Firefox

lol

 

[LibreQuest]

Seems the majority of users of the FreeBSD forums agree. I think if there were a market for this type of solution it would be apparent by now. This would be a situation where you would need to create a market which comes with compromise. Then you end up with ChromeOS with a FreeBSD base. lol

 

[Everke]

We could definitely expand our user base by having a solid desktop system but that might just attract a lot of stupid people.

What I'm saying is having a GUI (paid or unpaid) could be our downfall.

You couldnt be farther from the truth.
I honestly do not understand this kind of thinking. As if somebody using FreeBSD on their home computer as a desktop system, and having no clue nor any interest in the whereabouts of how the "magic is done" could somehow damage FreeBSD...
Say it honestly that you wouldnt like to see their "stupid" questions on the forum.
(As if you were somehow superior, just because you choose IT, and the other one is just some stupid artist, or stupid kidoo, because they didnt)

 

[Crivens]

The thing is, you only need to look at Linux to see how this will pan out. Yes, they overtook the BSDs in development, and now they are the dummy magnet. vermaden had a link about the mess that is gnome and how it poisons the rest of the ecosystem. Core will need to select which users to listen to and which to ignore. Starting such selections never turns out great.

 

[Everke]

Yes, but still you are the ones who decide what and how to support, you are not obliged to bow before any end user request, yet you are afraid making a step forward, fearing them, to the point that you rather even exclude them.
A truly great OS should proud itself as something that could easily be used even by the simplest of users. This does not equate to any dumbing down, simply ads more choice, even helping it itself to thrieve and prosper

 

[unitrunker]

A truly great OS should proud itself as something that could easily be used even by the simplest of users.

This is generally accomplished by providing sane defaults. A blind install results in something that works most of the time for most of the people. The base OS does this quite well. The few demanding the latest cutting edge features must RTFM to configure the tools how they want.

 

[sidetone]

A set of principles or standards would prevent a lot of poisoning by Linux, Windows, Poetterisms or other themes. No matter how many come over, FreeBSD would be protected. The shared BSD world would need its own ecosystem as well.

 

[vermaden]

Would you pay for a GUI based FreeBSD system?

Actually I already pay for it - but with my time and energy

 

[LibreQuest]

Actually I already pay for it - but with my time and energy

That's because you're awesome! You still have made my favorite guide for FreeBSD with your native UrbanTerror guide.

 

[athan]

I would rather pay for some serious hardware support, which is the biggest problem with FreeBSD desktop use...

 

[Cath O'Deray]

Seems the majority of users of the FreeBSD forums agree.

Let's note that The FreeBSD Forums is not necessarily a representative sample of users plus potential users.

I think if there were a market for this type of solution it would be apparent …

We certainly have:

1. a market for FreeBSD plus a GUI
2. a fair number of people who do already pay for this market to be better served.

I would rather pay for some serious hardware support, …

People donate to The FreeBSD Foundation. The Foundation funds improvements to hardware support … and so on.

I was thinking an installer with an option to add GUI during the install process …

That's probably most appealing, to users who will require a GUI.

… already have a solid desktop system. …

Improving the experience might also attract people who share FreeBSD’s values and contribute to the community, documentation, ports tree, and/or base.

Yep. The Foundation has made clear the intention to improve the desktop/user experience to make it easier to start using FreeBSD.

… A truly great OS should proud itself as something that could easily be used even by the simplest of users. This does not equate to any dumbing down, simply ads more choice, even helping it itself to thrieve and prosper

If this were a realistic scenario you wouldn't put your core people on it. It would be very user space level work that wouldn't even involve much with packaging. I think you would end up with stupid entry level users as that would be your market.

Packaging is relatively easy.

The greater challenge, which requires listening ears and much more, is to improve the user experience (UX).

Entry-level users, newcomers, are not stupid.

… We could definitely expand our user base by having a solid desktop system but that might just attract a lot of stupid people.

What I'm saying is having a GUI (paid or unpaid) could be our downfall.

Belittling potential users does not improve the prospects for FreeBSD.

We have various GUIs.

An improved UX is not a downfall. Check the responses to the first two of these three cross-posts:

GhostBSD makes FreeBSD a little less frightening for the Linux loyal – Traditional Unix sanity plus your choice of MATE or Xfce (by me on The Register)

Posted in r/BSD by u/lproven • 30 points and 41 comments

old.reddit.com

In particular:

❝… If you have time to read a 1000-page handbook, seriously, good for you. I don't. I review 50+ FOSS OSes a year and I need to write 2 articles a day. In this, I am similar to the average casual techie who might give a new OS a play for a few hours but is not going to spend a week on reading and research in how to get it working.​

​

❝I have worked professionally on the documentation teams of two enterprise Linux distros …​

​

❝… it is not the 1980s any more. …​

​

❝… over a dozen steps. It is not trivial and it is not easy.​

​

❝It is 2023. It should be trivial and it should be easy. …❞​

I made this post to be rather sarcastic though. …

Fair enough, I have a sense of humour.

… Core will need to select which users to listen to and which to ignore. Starting such selections never turns out great.

Not Core in isolation.

The recent survey — responses visible to The FreeBSD Foundation (I don't know who, in particular) plus Core — remained open much longer than originally intended. I reviewed openness every few days, now it is closed.