Maybe native Oracle, I guess. :eicer said:what functions you do not have enough if freebsd work as desktop?
All of BSD's what? All of its cookies?d_mon said:i think all of BSD's are made for servers
I take it you're referring to Linux here. Most of us here probably think FreeBSD is better than Linux (we wouldn't be here if we didn't) but it's not a competition thing. Linux is Linux, FreeBSD is FreeBSD. They are different operating systems with different focus.d_mon said:far from to compite with 'penguin'...
d_mon said:yeah is my think
YZMSQ said:Maybe native Oracle, I guess. :e
fonz said:All of BSD's what? All of its cookies?
If you meant to say that all flavors of BSD are intended primarily for servers, you are mistaken. See DesktopBSD and PC-BSD for instance.
Even so, it's still a silly statement.UNIXgod said:I'd like to think he meant the main 4:
wblock said:A desktop is just a different kind of server.
A server may not need a graphic card...:ewblock said:A desktop is just a different kind of server.
Any modern desktop without nVidia graphics will most probably end up needing it no more then a "true" server does though.YZMSQ said:A server may not need a graphic card...:e
YZMSQ said:A server may not need a graphic card...:e
UNIXgod said:I'd like to think he meant the main 4:
NetBSD
FreeBSD
OpenBSD
DragonflyBSD
and not the so called derivatives or inbred osx
quintessence said:DragonflyBSD is FreeBSD "derivate", not "main".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Software_Distribution#Significant_BSD_descendants
I suppose it's a bit of a thin line.fossala said:In that case so is OpenBSD it was "derived" from NetBSD.
quintessence said:DragonflyBSD is FreeBSD "derivate", not "main".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berkeley_Software_Distribution#Significant_BSD_descendants
Feel free to fix it, or send me a PM with [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] and I'll do the fixing.UNIXgod said:I believe that wiki page is off by putting DragonFlyBSD in the same category as PC-BSD and DesktopBSD.