FreeBSD and me united for ever

Why I chose to quit Windows

# 1 Because development chains are not welcome on windows.
- not only the shell is badly ruined to the point of introducing msys2
- but in addition, the compilers are suspect in the eyes of Windows defender so well that it increases the compilation times tenfold (see: View: https://twitter.com/wiz_a_thon/status/1180695964723449858?s=20
)

# 2 because of its awkward security design
- it is the designated victim of viruses
- real-time anti-viruses scrupt your own artefacts up close (go snooping elsewhere, window$ defender; you're polluting me!)

# 3 because I'm tired of suspecting malware when every morning windows keep scratching the hard drive.

# 4 because i'm tired of seeing the ram grabbed by the system

# 5 because I'm sick of the long updates every month and fear a power outage during that time.

# 6 because I'm tired of windows like changing the administrator experience, from one version to another

# 7 and as a corollary, because I'm tired of cursing Microsoft engineers


Why I chose to adopt FreeBSD

# 1 Because he loves developers, without bigotry; its license accepts you whether you are open source or not.

# 2 Because it is efficient, stable and safe at the same time

# 3 because the project-team and its distribution have only been doing 1, for 30 years.
- its community is therefore united around a single distribution.
- its development is continuous, sustainable and coordinated
- its ecosystem is standard, in fact.

# 4 because its documentation is of high quality

# 5 because it is easy to use (at least for a computer scientist)

# 5 because it respects your privacy; it doesn't squat your connection to send modestly called "statistics" or do whatever with your hard drive to the point of asking you questions about the faulty process.

# 7 because it doesn't mistake your desktop for a billboard

# 8 because as an authentic and last legitimate heir to UNIX, it respects ancestral POSIX traditions.

# 9 because its source code is open, compact and well designed so that its user can consider developing features in the near future and through this, repay the debt he owes to the development team.

# 10 Because almost everything that runs on Windows and Linux runs on FreeBSD thanks to wine and linux compatibility.

# 11 Because you can dress your office as you want and adjust it in your own hands
with KDE 5 & Plasma, you can disguise it as Windows 7 Aero, Windows 10, Mac OS X or macos.

In short, there is no photo


freeBSD.png
 
Couldn't you make that an animated gif picture that moves her when I click on it?
I clicked several times, but she ain't move her red devils horns.
Damnation ...
I can't, I can't ...
It would be censored because she finishes Full Monty.
Think about it : there are ingenuous children, here 😇

But anyway, don't be sad because the others two start to wriggle too
and believe me it's really not nice to watch.
 
# 4 because i'm tired of seeing the ram grabbed by the system
FreeBSD does the same thing

# 5 because I'm sick of the long updates every month and fear a power outage during that time.

# 6 because I'm tired of windows like changing the administrator experience, from one version to another

# 7 and as a corollary, because I'm tired of cursing Microsoft engineers
I guess you're about to find out about all the things which Windows & FreeBSD have in common 😂

Why I chose to adopt FreeBSD

# 2 Because it is efficient, stable and safe at the same time
That does depend on the administrator though, the OS doesn't protect you from mistakes. Windows does to some extend by the way ;)

# 3 because the project-team and its distribution have only been doing 1, for 30 years.
Hmm, Windows 1 came out in 1982, ergo the concept exists for almost 40 years.

Anyway, TL;DR... you're going to use FreeBSD because you don't like the other stuff. I think that's a rather flawed reasoning, IMO you're better off picking something because it'll suit your needs. But ey, each to their own :)
 
Thank you for interest and your honesty, ShelLuser.

FreeBSD does the same thing
I haven't the same experience than you.
Don't you think self-updating third-party software daemons pollute Windows RAM ?
And about all these svchost whom many windows users complain regularly for its RAM usage abuse (Disk and CPU abuses too) for instance ...
So many windows service daemons too and their whims...

Anyway, it depends of what you consider FreeBSD perimeter. Base system only or desktop too.
I guess FreeBSD Base system has made its embedded capability (NanoBSD and PicoBSD). Am I right ? What about Windows ...
If you include desktop environment, it's third-party software : it can't be counted.

At last, memory management is a well known science from decades.

I guess you're about to find out about all the things which Windows & FreeBSD have in common 😂
Concerning updates, I consider not too be skilled enough at this time. But I can see FreeBSD lets administrators the capability to do security updates only. You are free to upgrade or not. This is not the philosophy on Windows.

On FreeBSD, nevertheless, I have the feeling that you have to choose between ports or binaries, exclusively because as I can see, pre-build binaries are not updated all the time. As a result, switching back to pre-build binaries may downgrade some installed ports.
It's not really funny. And yes, update through ports is time consuming. I uninstalled chromium for this reason.

Maybe, with time and tricks, I could hope to workaround this.

But for #6 and #7, I can't agree with you. You clearly abuse.🤣

That does depend on the administrator though, the OS doesn't protect you from mistakes. Windows does to some extend by the way ;)
Huumm ... Have you ever heard about normal user, super user and sudo ?
Most of the time, I'm a simple user on my desktop but sometimes, I change myself in SU for a very short time.
Scared to frenetically type sudo rm -r * and what about alias rm='rm -i' somewhere in your .profile ?

I'm going to tell you a secret : I don't think there is one OS able to protect user by itself from his own mistakes.
But what I guess is that FreeBSD is more reliable than windows.

Hmm, Windows 1 came out in 1982, ergo the concept exists for almost 40 years.
This reflexion of mine was not focused on M$ but on GNU/Linux. So many Linux distributions, so many strengths but never in the same distro. Even more, some distributions live and die. What appends for users ?
Have you see their documentation ? Minimalist, mostly.
Anyway, TL;DR... you're going to use FreeBSD because you don't like the other stuff. I think that's a rather flawed reasoning, IMO you're better off picking something because it'll suit your needs. But ey, each to their own :)
You do not understand my mind.
I'm software developer. Honestly, for a software developer, the more convenient to develop is a POSIX system.
All main OS are posix compatible by now. Even more, posix-shells are more powerful than windows powershell and more handy too for automated tasks.
When I was student ... a long time ago (in 1994), I needed to install a Unix to develop my school projects at home, to avoid university quarters. Windows was single threaded and filename limited to 8 characters. Fortunately, a very cheap Unix-like system existed : Slackware Linux. It was great for me because I could learn shell at home too. 👍
Few years later, I changed for Suse. But at this time, despite of its defaults (Millenium, Vista and Ten at least) softwares were mostly on Windows. Linux was an UFO, an enhanced (Window managers existed yet) amateur OS until the Linux foundation was founded and canvass major computer manufacturers. I skip my HP/UX, Dec Alpha and Solaris professional experience.

Things have changed. A great software ecosystem exists. Wine is (quite) mature.
But too many linux distros exist. I've turned toward FuryBSD and NomadBSD because I had some bad remember of installing FreeBSD ...
Finally, I tried to install FreeBSD and surprise, it is easy to install, easy to solve installation troubles. Well documented. I adopt it.

As you see, FreeBSD is not a default desktop OS for me. As I explained in my initial post, it's a convenient OS for the computer scientist I am.

That's all, folks.
 
You can mix packages & ports, as long they're both on the same branch (quarterly/latest); but beware non-default options (read one of the fine howtos on that here or search the net). Install one of the ZFS snapshoting utilities, then you can conveniently recover from accidental file deletions.
 
FreeBSD does the same thing


I guess you're about to find out about all the things which Windows & FreeBSD have in common 😂


That does depend on the administrator though, the OS doesn't protect you from mistakes. Windows does to some extend by the way ;)


Hmm, Windows 1 came out in 1982, ergo the concept exists for almost 40 years.

Anyway, TL;DR... you're going to use FreeBSD because you don't like the other stuff. I think that's a rather flawed reasoning, IMO you're better off picking something because it'll suit your needs. But ey, each to their own :)

I think I understand where you are coming from :D

I would have agreed with you that the differences are so-so, but Windows 10 really marked a new paradigm where you no longer own your own computer and you really feel it. I have never been an open-source advocate, and even used to view people filling online forums with arguments about proprietary vs open-source as ideological extremists, but Windows 10 really changed my mind. This was the first time in my life I felt oppressed by my OS, all of sudden Stallman & Cie looked a lot less crazy to me.

On FreeBSD many man pages written 20 years ago are still relevant today, almost everything is documented and once you get in the feel of the rolling updates of the base OS, you are all set: you can confidently invest in creating shell scripts knowing that they will remain relevant for the next decades. The only disruption I have seen so far is the move from subversion to git, and minor changes like the move from pkg_add & Cie to pkg.

These days there really is a world of difference between FreeBSD and windows and I wouldn't be keen to downplay this difference. This may sound minor but after years of being abused on hundreds of little things, and a small number of huge things when you finally find a place where you have freedom the feeling is huge (and real).
 
Install one of the ZFS snapshoting utilities, then you can conveniently recover from accidental file deletions.
Oops, sorry I opted for UFS, believing ZFS was functionnally oversized for my need even if it's passionnating.
Anyway, if something goes wrong, the system may be rescued easily. More easily, from my point of view than Linux.
And what is precious for me is saved on the cloud via git for instance.

Thank you again for your light, Mjölnir
 
Why I chose to quit Windows

# 1 Because development chains are not welcome on windows.
- not only the shell is badly ruined to the point of introducing msys2
- but in addition, the compilers are suspect in the eyes of Windows defender so well that it increases the compilation times tenfold (see: View: https://twitter.com/wiz_a_thon/status/1180695964723449858?s=20
)

# 2 because of its awkward security design
- it is the designated victim of viruses
- real-time anti-viruses scrupt your own artefacts up close (go snooping elsewhere, window$ defender; you're polluting me!)

# 3 because I'm tired of suspecting malware when every morning windows keep scratching the hard drive.

# 4 because i'm tired of seeing the ram grabbed by the system

# 5 because I'm sick of the long updates every month and fear a power outage during that time.

# 6 because I'm tired of windows like changing the administrator experience, from one version to another

# 7 and as a corollary, because I'm tired of cursing Microsoft engineers


Why I chose to adopt FreeBSD

# 1 Because he loves developers, without bigotry; its license accepts you whether you are open source or not.

# 2 Because it is efficient, stable and safe at the same time

# 3 because the project-team and its distribution have only been doing 1, for 30 years.
- its community is therefore united around a single distribution.
- its development is continuous, sustainable and coordinated
- its ecosystem is standard, in fact.

# 4 because its documentation is of high quality

# 5 because it is easy to use (at least for a computer scientist)

# 5 because it respects your privacy; it doesn't squat your connection to send modestly called "statistics" or do whatever with your hard drive to the point of asking you questions about the faulty process.

# 7 because it doesn't mistake your desktop for a billboard

# 8 because as an authentic and last legitimate heir to UNIX, it respects ancestral POSIX traditions.

# 9 because its source code is open, compact and well designed so that its user can consider developing features in the near future and through this, repay the debt he owes to the development team.

# 10 Because almost everything that runs on Windows and Linux runs on FreeBSD thanks to wine and linux compatibility.

# 11 Because you can dress your office as you want and adjust it in your own hands
with KDE 5 & Plasma, you can disguise it as Windows 7 Aero, Windows 10, Mac OS X or macos.

In short, there is no photo


View attachment 9259
For the non-french speakers saying there is no photo means that there is no comparasion :D
 
I think I understand where you are coming from :D

I would have agreed with you that the differences are so-so, but Windows 10 really marked a new paradigm where you no longer own your own computer and you really feel it. I have never been an open-source advocate, and even used to view people filling online forums with arguments about proprietary vs open-source as ideological extremists, but Windows 10 really changed my mind. This was the first time in my life I felt oppressed by my OS, all of sudden Stallman & Cie looked a lot less crazy to me.

On FreeBSD many man pages written 20 years ago are still relevant today, almost everything is documented and once you get in the feel of the rolling updates of the base OS, you are all set: you can confidently invest in creating shell scripts knowing that they will remain relevant for the next decades. The only disruption I have seen so far is the move from subversion to git, and minor changes like the move from pkg_add & Cie to pkg.

These days there really is a world of difference between FreeBSD and windows and I wouldn't be keen to downplay this difference. This may sound minor but after years of being abused on hundreds of little things, and a small number of huge things when you finally find a place where you have freedom the feeling is huge (and real).
Yes, this is my point of view too. There is place for everyone in software community : for private, open source and free/libre software.
Nevertheless, I dislike what R. Stallman preaches for decades. To me, it's sophism to say proprietor software (privateur, in french with a pejorative connotation). To me, it implies the negation of intellectual property : I might be communist but my ideas are mine at least. And I respect the one that lets me use its software but desires to keep the control of...
even if sometimes it breaks my little sweet ❤️ (http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/), do I, Dr Martin Schweiger ;)
 
Yes, this is my point of view too. There is place for everyone in software community : for private, open source and free/libre software.
Nevertheless, I dislike what R. Stallman preaches for decades. To me, it's sophism to say proprietor software (privateur, in french with a pejorative connotation). To me, it implies the negation of intellectual property : I might be communist but my ideas are mine at least. And I respect the one that lets me use its software but desires to keep the control of...
even if sometimes it breaks my little sweet ❤️ (http://orbit.medphys.ucl.ac.uk/), do I, Dr Martin Schweiger ;)

In my opinion, I do not think that putting some program under GNU GPL is negating intellectual property, putting under Public Domain would be closer to this aspect. For me "negating intellectual property" would be to remove you as an author of your own work. In that sense, GPL licenses are not doing that at all. For instance you can even sell software under these licenses. The main difference between these and BSD based licenses are the fact that GPL are far less permissive in the sense they are not compatible (in term of cohabitation) with proprietary licensed code.
 
In my opinion, I do not think that putting some program under GNU GPL is negating intellectual property, putting under Public Domain would be closer to this aspect. For me "negating intellectual property" would be to remove you as an author of your own work. In that sense, GPL licenses are not doing that at all. For instance you can even sell software under these licenses. The main difference between these and BSD based licenses are the fact that GPL are far less permissive in the sense they are not compatible (in term of cohabitation) with proprietary licensed code.
Totally agreed with you, my words overpass my thoughts. I can't say "it's a negation." That's not true. Indeed, I read and read again to understand why I wrote this but I still don't know. As a result, I should be more careful. I don't recognize me. I guess I've done an abusive shortcut.
At the contrary, I'm aware that releasing under GPL juridically protects your own software from its use in a closed source software.
 
[I=, as a] Contrarian or Microsoft schill, let's harp on three items:

not only the shell is badly ruined to the point of introducing msys2
MSYS2 brings POSIX to the Windows, it doesn't replace PowerShell.

the compilers are suspect in the eyes of Windows defender so well that it increases the compilation times tenfold
Use BSD Toolchain here, and VSPackage over there, i.e.

When in Rome, do as the Romans do" -- St. Augustine

it is the designated victim of viruses
1. I never run anti-malware on Windows (2000~10). I disable them (Defender, 3rd-party).
2. OneHalf (virus) was the first/last time -- courtesy of BBS => 1x in DOS & 0x in NT.
3. PEBMAC beats Soteria.
 
[I=, as a] Contrarian or Microsoft schill, let's harp on three items:


MSYS2 brings POSIX to the Windows, it doesn't replace PowerShell.
Oh ! for my usage, bash shell was enough. I can't say if PowerShell can do more.
Use BSD Toolchain here, and VSPackage over there, i.e.

You think about mingw certainly. It works very well on Windows. clang and clang-cl too.
And when you develop a multi-platform C/C++ application, it's very useful.

Anyway, I had in mind, eclipse. Eclipse slows down unless declaring it as an exception in windows defender. And anyway, it is not enough; any process forked by eclipse should be registered in the same way... Fed up.

1. I never run anti-malware on Windows (2000~10). I disable them (Defender, 3rd-party).
2. OneHalf (virus) was the first/last time -- courtesy of BBS => 1x in DOS & 0x in NT.
3. PEBMAC beats Soteria.

😄 You like living dangerously, do you ?
By digital virus, we implicitly understand disease that supposes your computer dysfunctions.

But, most of the time, there is no advantage for a cyber-criminal to act like this. The better consists in spying the host, not to kill it, until at least, secret information appears. Another advantage consists in using your computer as an internet relay to commit crimes. Discretion is the priority.

As a result, nobody can't be sure his computer has not been infected even if he is careful. Human practices are not the only fault.
Vulnerabilities of your computer may give you away...
 
Usually I will never post such kind of thread like this. Remember, if you said so then when FreeBSD sucks, doesn't work for you, you are not allowed to post a rant because you have put all in FreeBSD to the extent that being united. I retain the rights to rant and to say FreeBSD sucks if it doesn't work for me, though, because I have not dared to make such a statement like you.
 
Usually I will never post such kind of thread like this. Remember, if you said so then when FreeBSD sucks, doesn't work for you, you are not allowed to post a rant because you have put all in FreeBSD to the extent that being united. I retain the rights to rant and to say FreeBSD sucks if it doesn't work for me, though, because I have not dared to make such a statement like you.
To me, feel free to criticize FreeBSD or ask help on these forums or maybe on freebsd developers IRC.

I guess fair reviews are welcome on this feedback forum and useful for improving the OS.

My declaration doesn't assume I encounter no difficulties with FreeBSD.

For instance, unless building a wine64 C simple program and running it, I can't, at this time, test any software for windows. For instance, I fail to install FreeCAD for windows 64 bit. I'm searching to understand why thanks to wine logs. If I can't attempt nothing else, I will solicit some help soon.

Another trouble is hibernation. My BIOS doesn't implement S4 BIOS. FreeBSD doesn't implement it as well.

It's a concern of convenience at work.

Nevertheless, I keep a little hope to be able to implement it since OpenBSD (and Linux) implement it. During my spare time, I intent to document this capability.

That's what I appreciate with permissive software. Community and homemade implementation : there is, most of the time, a chance to fulfill your need.
 
But ey, each to their own
Ha! A bit off topic but then I think the whole thread is off topic. English is not my native language. Today I was writing an email where I wanted to use this phrase. My google-fu drove me crazy, I was not able to figure it out. And then I saw your answer.. :)
 
Not an english native speaker either, but "each to their own" sounds wrong, I'm pretty sure correct saying is "to each its own"
 
As a native English speaker "each to his/her/their own" would probably be more common. Although I'm based in the South, so other variations might be more common in other parts of the country. I'm always pleasantly surprised to hear non-native English speakers use less common idioms like that.
 
To join in the bikeshed discussion, 60 something year old NYC resident, and I'd say to each their own, or each to their own, sound equally correct to me. The "ey" at the beginning seemed like a mistype of "Hey". I feel as if the expression has a slight nuance of "your choice is bad, but I don't care," but that just might be me.
 
Back
Top