which O.S. do you use ?

  • FreeBSD on two storage and backup servers and on my bhyve laptop. Another installation (XFCE) on one desktop computer
  • Several Devuan linux installations for desktop purposes
  • Windows 10. Very sophisticated game launcher. Comes with a CLI and a functional IP stack.
  • Several family households interconnected with Raspberry Pi as router, firewall and VPN gateway, running standard Debian (Raspian?). nftables is pretty cool, btw
  • At home, I have a desk reserved for retro PCs: a 386DX/40 running DOS 6.22 and Windows 3.1. There's also a i486DX4/100 running Windows 95 and a K6/233 running Windows 98. Those are the systems I had back in the 90s.
  • My C64
  • Amiga 500 und 1200
  • At work, management ******* have banned Linux / Unix desktops some time ago. We had to decide between Windows and Mac and I chose Mac. After one year of use, still unsure which GUI is worse and less suited for IT work, Windows or Mac
 
I inherited a code base in Objective-C/C++. The first thing i did was to port it to proper C++.
Objective-C/C++ is garbage. Totally unreadable.
 
Mixing C++ and Objective-C is a no-no. Objective-C, uses right, can be really good. The syntax is horribly, I give you that. The concept behind it is nice.
 
  • Windows at work, because it provides job security for our IT people, and it's the only option ;)
  • FreeBSD on a Panasonic Let's Note CF-MX5 (like this...)
  • NetBSD on a ThinkPad T61
  • macOS 10.14 on a 27" iMac
  • macOS 10.15 on a 21" iMac
  • MX Linux in a VM on the 27" iMac
 
  • FreeBSD (Fileservers, Mobile Pentest boxes with several VMs, Firewalls, two HTPCs, Nextcloud server)
  • Artix Linux (systemd-free Arch variant on my "all purpose" desktop/laptop and for the family)
  • RHEL / Alma Linux (at work, where I cannot get away with anything else)
  • Devuan (very limited, if something needs a distro from the Debian/Ubuntu world)
  • Kali (for pentesting)
  • Windows (via Citrix at work, in VMs for lab environments - I have no bare metal installs left)
 
MacBook Pro ( 14", M4 - MacOS for work)
Arch Linux ( Dell XPS 13" for backup and spare laptop for work )
Windows ( for gaming )
Intel NUC ( FreeBSD bhyve VM )
 
Maturin said:
Heroes of Might and Magic III
Heroes of Might and Magic IV
Master of Orion II
Diablo (1)
Patrizier II Gold
Die Völker (Alien Nations, Gold Edition)
688 Hunter-Killer
Hearts of Iron II (Armageddon)
Airline Tycoon First Class (damn, I found a bug which makes it impossible to win an open game.😡)
You Don't Know Jack (German Edition; together with my wife it's always very much fun! 🤓)
Click to expand...

Thank you, an interesting list. I've only played Diablo (1), and Heroes of Might and Magic III and IV. I still play Heroes of Might and Magic III.
 
Espionage724 said:
Windows; does everything with the least hassle :p

For Linux I go for openSUSE Tumbleweed (rolling, up-to-date, seemingly has good QA).

FreeBSD as a desktop OS was interesting, but I found myself going to the handbook/searching too-frequently for minor stuff and don't want to spend time doing that currently; I'm used to plugging in an external NTFS USB drive and GUI'ing files in seconds Windows/Linux, but have to either sit down and configure a similar set-up on FreeBSD, or "quick" mount it through mount command-line and associated flags/research.
Click to expand...
Meh, I feel differently about this a little later; FreeBSD is fun :p

I can confidently use Windows and Linux. But I like OS tweaking for performance and FreeBSD's works nice for that! No-tweaks is already faster than what I've seen from other OSs, and FreeBSD's core is simple and understandable enough for me to find interesting new things to try!

I wasn't really into Arch Linux's install process because I could get a good experience with a mainstream distro with easier reinstalls. But FreeBSD is unique (was the most appealing BSD option for me initially) making the manual install worthwhile! I mainly didn't like manual partitioning on Arch, while my fastest FreeBSD install time from memstick and GUI prompts was 2 or 4 mins :p
 
I almost want to say if you know, you know, but if you did, you wouldn't ask. Many companies will insist on RH or a clone. My last company did. This was before RH went all Microsoft-ish and made it harder to use clones, but we used CentOS, and a boss that was convinced by some people selling us an Oracle database to use Oracle Linux (another RH clone) on some database servers. I was allowed to use Fedora on my workstation, but not FreeBSD or any other Linux.

The reason for my workstation limitation was that my boss at the time, was a bit of a rigid sort, and the reason for using an RH clone on the servers was for consistancy, and the fact that many things (this was several years ago now), were either only supported on RH and friends, or only ran on RH and friends. Even where I am now, a mostly FreeBSD place, we have some backup software that only runs on Linux and we choose RH clones for it. While at my last company, though, for example, we were looking at Zimbra as a possibility, and it only was supported on RH and a few others--I just vaguely remember having to modify something so that it would run on CentOS (this was back when CentOS was a clone of RH, pre-CentoOS stream).

Aside from support for real RH machines, which at the time, at least, was supposed to be pretty good, RH and clones were pretty stable. You wouldn't run an update and suddenly find that your web configurations didn't work.

Anyway, at many places RH or a variant is what is used by company policy, and I imagine that JWJones has a boss like my old boss, who insists that the workstations are also RH or a clone, or perhaps they just want to use it on the workstation so that they can predict any issues with the servers, or just get used to the RH way.

As I always like to spam my own pages, I'll mention that I have a page on using RHEL10 or a clone with labwc or dwl, Wayland substitutes for openbox and dwm respectively, at https://srobb.net/rhel10.html
 
The problem with RedHat Enterprise Linux at work isn't so much that Linux itself. Rocky for example is fairly usable.

The problem is that companies with the mentality to demand REL are the same companies that then lag 6-8 years behind the current release - and that is a very practical problem.
 
I am so dated…
I keep windows 98se on a vm so I can play infocom zork games on 16-bit DOS.
I don’t game otherwise
<grin>
 
scottro said:
I almost want to say if you know, you know, but if you did, you wouldn't ask.
Click to expand...
I've never worked in corporations, so I don't know.
scottro said:
I was allowed to use Fedora on my workstation, but not FreeBSD or any other Linux.
Click to expand...
I've always chosen my own platform at work. But I'll say it again, I haven't worked for corporations.
I'm shocked, to be honest. Some dictators think that Windows "provides security for work",
But you have an approach at the level of a "corporate flag"...
Our "management" also thought that the Windows platform + М.Е.Doc = "platinum fortification", until June 27, 2017 happened...
Thank you for spending your time on me.
 
fmc000 said:
Can't speak for Alma but in my experience RHEL support is top notch.
Click to expand...
With RHEL, packages easily available from standard repos on other distributions, are hidden on several dozen arcane repos which might or might not be available on your host. It just depends whether your company has paid enough and paid for the right subscriptions. So you never know for sure if a certain package is unavailable because no one has packaged it yet or unavailable because you need to pay more or pay for different stuff. And after some time, you just end up adding a bunch of external repos or installing downloaded RPMs locally, just to get things done.

In any case, I prefer the Debian way. You know, /etc/apache2/{conf,mods,sites}-{available,enabled} and that kind of stuff. I like being asked by the package installer what to do if there are local changes to config files. I like sensible default configurations.

But back to RHEL: I always say, if all Linuxes were like Redhat, which is our Linux standard at work, I'd be using Windows :-D
 
FreeBSD. Why else would I be on these forums? (I have 2 hard drives, the other one has Linux for when I need to run Linux software. Linuxulator is a security threat that I will not use, given how much Linux malware is out there.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top