I went full-time FreeBSD for a couple weeks. These are my takeaways.

[AlfredoLlaquet]

Isn't that how my chainsaw/bicycle analogy came across? -i.e. sometimes i think it's necessary to slow down to go fast.

Your analogy coincides with my division, yes. Curiously, it doesn't coincide with yours.

 

[balanga]

Recently, Jupiter Broadcasting's main show had a week-long challenge where the hosts and many of the audience tried switching to a BSD for a week. While it seems that 2/3 of the

ISTR having a Jupiter Boadcasting channel a long time ago when I first started using KODI and often watched BSD Now, but when I check the website

BSD Now

A weekly podcast and the place to B...SD

www.bsdnow.tv

I don't see any videos.

Is it just me that can't find them?

 

[waym0re]

I've been using linux as a main or secondary computer for 25 years now (started with Debian), and experimenting FreeBSD at least 10 years, probably more. But always, I had to use Windows at work. Well, in the past 6 years I've been on posix systems only, mostly running terminals in i3. This past month, I had to use Windows to deal with a few things. I couldn't believe how ridiculous all the icons and apps are. I could excuse free apps of having unpolished UI, but this was ridiculous. And by far the worse was Adobe Reader (yup, my problems had to do with filling pdf forms). The entire UI is designed to get you to upgrade. On the left, options that are all unavailable in the current edition, and on the right a "This document is long, want AI to resume it for you?". Like, no? I care about my work and need to carefully read and fill up. If I wanted AI I'd copy/paste it to some AI. And everything a user COULD want, like selecting a specific page, zooming, adjusting the page display, was hidden and hard to find. As in, if you've ever read a book on UI, it would make you depressed. By my estimate it must literally designed to make the experience frustrating with the belief that upgrading will smooth things, which I doubt it does.

I really don't think I could use FreeBSD exclusively. For one thing, ZFS, as good as it is, isn't flexible enough for my data needs. Could it be my daily driver? It could, but I honestly prefer the bleeding edge of Arch.

I see FreeBSD more like my Debian. It's a sacrifice PC, the one you use to make sure things are kosher and won't screw up on the production server. It's not the lab workstation I'm running my skunk-work experiments on. Although, actually, I am running skunk-work experiments on, but either on a VM or ssh-ing into a mini-pc running FreeBSD. I'm sorry if it turns out my views aren't that positive.

 

[LibreQuest]

"Getting a graphical desktop was as easy as following a youtube video"

:/

Chapter 5. The X Window System

This chapter describes how to install and configure the X Window System providing a graphical environment

docs.freebsd.org

Chapter 6. Wayland

This chapter describes how to install and configure Wayland and compositors on FreeBSD, which provides a graphical user environment

docs.freebsd.org

"I regretted my decision to install Ghost-BSD for the last challenge, since it wasn’t a pure ground-up freebsd install and could be considered cheating"

But why?

"Prerequisites are simple: to enter the competition, just install BSD. Any BSD"

In my opinion the challenge was failed by not using the handbook and possibly by not using GhostBSD if it were your first choice due to ruling it out as being cheating when the defined prerequisites were met.

 

[hedwards]

I'm so very much confused by things like this. Also, I've seen terms like "Linux nerd" or "Linux poweruser" or "guru" or whatever but at the same time, the "requirements" are childish. -e.g. "install a package" or "start a service" or "install a ''container''". That label (those requirements attached to it) seem so very demeaning! Please stop using that label--if those are the requirements to obtain that level--for yourself or others (in either Linux or BSD none of those requirements should be unattainable in very little time and I have confidence you can be far above that in no time). As far as I could tell, a few hours reading the handbook (for any of the BSDs) would have gotten you to "level 11" in one shot.

Oh, and stop trying to find the equal of X on Y. Pick a task and find the section in the handbook (-i.e. don't try to find "sysctl" in the handbook; find "service management"). "connect to the internet", "install a desktop", "service management", etc.

A lot of that has to do with the way that computers have been dumbed down over the years and the users infantilized. I was able to use the Apple ][ for basic things when I was in elementary school. The degree to which people are allowed to pretend like typing a few basic commands that don't change much is some sort of God-like ability is deeply problematic.

IMHO, there's not much point in pointing out such things unless you're pushing things a bit by at least doing more complicated stuff like scripting, jails or at least customizing your install in some interesting way. It's not elitist, it's just that if you're just using the computer for normal computer things, you're just a normal user and there's really no shame in that at all.

 

[AlfredoLlaquet]

IMHO, there's not much point in pointing out such things unless you're pushing things a bit by at least doing more complicated stuff like scripting, jails or at least customizing your install in some interesting way. It's not elitist, it's just that if you're just using the computer for normal computer things, you're just a normal user and there's really no shame in that at all.

+1

Very true.

I think this all has to do with misconceptions and stereotypes. Before, Linux was the arcane thing, and if you managed to use it in any way, you could boast about being a computer god among the other normies that hadn't even tried. Now that Linux is mainstream, the BSD family has taken its place in the collective imagination of the normies who use computers for common things.