No, he does not. Nor is he using Word. He is also very unlikely to change his habits, you see?OKO, please...
Do you think that for example Günter Grass is using OpenBSD for writing his books??
No, he does not. Nor is he using Word. He is also very unlikely to change his habits, you see?OKO, please...
Do you think that for example Günter Grass is using OpenBSD for writing his books??
How does it create fragmentation if it is actually just FreeBSD pre-configured? Fragmentation assumes forking of the original which isn't the case here. Neither GhostBSD nor PC-BSD are forked from FreeBSD. All of PC-BSD's utilities are available in the ports tree as well. If anything these projects are encouraging growth for FreeBSD IMO.I was using Ubuntu as an example of having DE variants that coincide with its' core platform (Ubuntu). Customization is irrelevant, unless PC-BSD or Ubuntu is using its' own infrastructure (meaning different base, ports, src, etc), is it the same thing. PC-BSD should be called FreeBSD/Lumina because practically, there's no difference. Hence why it's pointless, and it creates communal fragmentation.
How does it create fragmentation if it is actually just FreeBSD pre-configured? Fragmentation assumes forking of the original which isn't the case here. Neither GhostBSD nor PC-BSD are forked from FreeBSD. All of PC-BSD's utilities are available in the ports tree as well. If anything these projects are encouraging growth for FreeBSD IMO.
Yes, they tend to fetch rather good money on eBay, so if you do not need it any more...I like:
- Automatic Wifi-installation at install-time. I remember horrible times either manually setting it up or using a wifi-cable until I found the right solution.
Well, that's an i3 or their documentation issue, not a FreeBSD issue.I dislike:
- Missing bsdfan documentation
- Took me two hours until I realised why i3 wasn't working. I created a config file without knowing that thereby it does not read /usr/local/etc-files anymore and hence nothing was working properly.
But, gnome who cares? It seems to me a desk too heavy, to been a failure the implementation of gnome 3.14.
Since a few weeks ago, I am proving GhostBSD for desktop in virtualbox, a cute and lightweight system that flies, and remains stable the system GhostBSD 10.1 beta2 MATE, actually left me surprised, nothing comparable with the PCBSD is very heavy.
Well, that's an i3 or their documentation issue, not a FreeBSD issue.
i3 man page said:FILES
~/.i3/config (or ~/.config/i3/config)
When starting, i3 looks for configuration files in the following order:
1. ~/.config/i3/config (or $XDG_CONFIG_HOME/i3/config if set)
2. /etc/xdg/i3/config (or $XDG_CONFIG_DIRS/i3/config if set)
3. ~/.i3/config
4. /etc/i3/config
You can specify a custom path using the -c option.
... What people mean by "good desktop OS," in the end, is "Can any moron used to Windows learn how to use it in two minutes?" The answer will always be "No," and so the answer to whether Linux and *BSD are good desktop OSes will always be "No."
.... --*nix will always and forever be a "bad desktop OS." For everyone else--the people willing to learn and try new things, who are aware of their own ignorance and willing to do something about it--*nix is whatever the hell you want to make it. The debate over what is or is not a "good desktop OS" is insoluble and idiotic. Let it die, already......
So how does a first time user find out, the newly created file is actually useless and he has to copy the files from /usr/local/etc/i3/config?
I had to discard the idea of using FreeBSD and installed Debian on that machine, it created a perfect config file, just like you said. But on FreeBSD, it creates a config with nothing but mod+d and mod+enter
I think which system is best for your desktop largely depends on how you use your desktop. If somebody has to run loads of Windows applications, it may be pointless to install anything but Windows. If it's just a few apps, VirtualBox exists and runs any Windows stuff beautifully.
Same for Linux. Not sure which applications might be running exclusively on Linux, but if you have them, use Linux (or again, VirtualBox if only occasional).
If heavy dependencies on particular OS's don't exist, FreeBSD is a rather very good choice for a desktop. Sure, some hardware limitations may exist, but for the majority of relatively recent hardware, you should be fine.
What you can hold against FreeBSD (in comparison to Debian/Ubuntu) is that making your desktop work initially takes a lot more effort and tuning. But once that's done, you don't need to worry about it any more. It just runs -- rather beautifully and extremely stable. Also, you've learned a lot along the way about what's actually going on, which Linux increasingly successfully hides from you. (It's becoming more and more of a Windows-y experience, IHHO)
There's a lot of features like ZFS, jails, OSS (as opposed to the rubbish broken PulseAudio), ports, relatively sane upgrade paths (and if you break something, use zfs rollback and try again), and many more, which I personally think are stronger than what Linux can offer, and they justify that additional effort.
Also, you can customise FreeBSD a lot easier than any Linux (Gentoo possibly being an exception). Of course you can compile stuff manually with Debian (or any other Linux), but chances are you won't, because it requires a lot more work to keep up to date without breaking things afterwards, as all of them assume that you are using the provided binary packages. FreeBSD ports handle that a lot better.
Typing this on FreeBSD 10-STABLE (XFCE desktop). I have had exactly zero system or window manager crashes on this desktop, no f***-ups with audio or anything awkward going on. It was worth the effort for me personally.
I am also very disappointed that Debian went with systemd. Is it now just a tool of Red hat?
Since PC-BSD changed its update model to use ZFS snapshot features and boot-environments I haven't ever got to situation where I need to reinstall system. Before that, yes update system was horrific and had good chance of messing up your system. Nowadays it is mostly small annoying problems, like making it to keep older Nvidia drivers instead of newer blob, as it does not support my old GTX260. Even if new update messes up system, I only need to choose previous version from grub menu, to get to pre-update working system.One excellent answer was "Updates are horrible with PC-BSD and package-manager do not work together properly" That's a very good reason to stay away from PC-BSD. If I have the choice among spending three days to install a FreeBSD with a lot of compiling and searching and stuff, and spending two hours installing PC-BSD every two months, because an update breaks my whole configuration, I know what to pick
Hm, sad to bring this one up again.
I just plugged a two year old external hard disk in a FreeBSD 10 box, and another error, couldn't identify it. Google brought up a lot of those incidents, but no solution.
Sorry Berkeley, but 10 years ago the USB stack of FreeBSD was a mess, 10 years! USB is de facto Standard in connecting peripherical devices and it's still bringing up errors? Technical knock-out for FreeBSD...