freebsd desktop

mbernat37

New Member


Messages: 7

#1
I would like to find out because I'm worried one thing or freebsd is better for the desktop than linux if such a thread was moved then sorry and please understand for thanks
 

juan9182

Active Member

Thanks: 20
Messages: 171

#3
I would like to find out because I'm worried one thing or freebsd is better for the desktop than linux if such a thread was moved then sorry and please understand for thanks
i dont think so, the 90% depend upon the graphic card drivers,nvidia and intel drivers runs fine..better nvidia.
there is no window manager that run better on Linux o FreeBSD,same for
the applications(file managers,terminal emulator,etc), except for a few applications that have no support
like opera(i miss it....)
and for the "base" system,well,i am a ex Linux user(10/15/years) and i not find any diference with Linux,everything runs just like is suppose to do

but if you make me choise, a choise FreeBSD
 

Russ Perkins

New Member

Thanks: 1
Messages: 17

#4
I don't think it's better or worse. It's a matter of choice. Both have strengths, it's about what you want and are willing and able to do. Sometimes hardware will cause you to stumble, find a work around. Sometimes you break things and have to fix them. I run both on the same hardware and like them both, at this point more partial to FreeBSD I just wish I could run the latest version of Opera but that's another story.
 

Trihexagonal

Daemon

Thanks: 634
Messages: 1,200

#5
I would like to find out because I'm worried one thing or freebsd is better for the desktop than linux if such a thread was moved then sorry and please understand for thanks
Better as in Ford vs Chevrolet? Pepsi vs Coke?

I have 4 laptops running FreeBSD and 0 running Linux, if that's any indication, and I'm not missing out on anything I want to do on them
 

stratacast1

Active Member

Thanks: 20
Messages: 185

#7
I used to be Linux-only, but open minded to FreeBSD. However, now I prefer FreeBSD on servers and like the idea of it on a workstation, but not a personal computer. For me, too much stuff is missing such as KDE Plasma 5 (area51 doesn't count), Firefox Nightly, Spotify, and some others. If FreeBSD was equally supported in what software is available like with Linux I would definitely switch my own machines. For now though, FreeBSD server all the way
 

drhowarddrfine

Son of Beastie

Thanks: 974
Messages: 2,865

#9
The majority of users don't use KDE anything or Firefox Nightly and there is a decent spotify player mentioned so most people, such as myself, are perfectly happy with FreeBSD as their desktop.
 

stratacast1

Active Member

Thanks: 20
Messages: 185

#10
I've never tried that before or heard of it, I'll take a look at it, I did see there is a web client for Spotify now too but I never tried it vs. the client that Linux/Mac OSX/Windows has.

The majority of users don't use KDE anything or Firefox Nightly and there is a decent spotify player mentioned so most people, such as myself, are perfectly happy with FreeBSD as their desktop.
Probably the majority of users on FreeBSD, but a lot of Linux users have transitioned to KDE Plasma 5, myself included. I require Firefox Nightly 1 to help test upcoming releases of Firefox and 2 there are features in Nightly that I like that won't come to stable until many months later, but Nightly users indeed are a minority. Something like music I can fudge on, but those are the 2 things I primarily require that FreeBSD sadly doesn't have. That's cool you're happy with FreeBSD as a desktop OS, I wish I could be personally :D it's a great platform
 

Loala

New Member

Thanks: 1
Messages: 8

#11
I used to use Debian and Arch linux but now use FreeBSD.
Before I properly configured my laptop, I felt bit laggy but after I went through the handbook, other docs and forum articles and finished to fix settings, I feel my laptop works much faster and smoother than was with those linux distros.
Another pros I think is that configuration is much much cleaner and easier. So it is easy and needs little effort to maintain upgrades and stuff.
And as far as the device settings and prefixes, in FreeBSD it is more correctly working with my hardware than in linux, plus the way userland working is very logical, so it is very easy to know how system is working for me.
For applications support, All of the programs I use is in packages and working great so I don't feel any trouble with that.

The only lagging point of FreeBSD than linux I found so far is a lack of suspend to disk (s4).
I could use suspend to disk with linuxes without any trouble and it was really useful. I would say it is sort of critical as for the Desktops... But I know that is not implemented yet for FreeBSD.

Except that, I satisfy with every other things so much about FreeBSD so I decided to stick with FreeBSD anyway.. :)
 

drhowarddrfine

Son of Beastie

Thanks: 974
Messages: 2,865

#12
Probably the majority of users on FreeBSD, but a lot of Linux users have transitioned to KDE Plasma 5
Do you have a count? I'd bet most don't. But it's not a FreeBSD problem directly. It's a problem getting someone to port it.
but Nightly users indeed are a minority
As I said. I'm a web developer and run a company with 10 developers and we don't use it either. But I've read, in the past, that people have gotten Nightly to work by just downloading and compiling it. It seems that, years ago, I did it myself but don't recall.
 

rorgoroth

New Member

Thanks: 4
Messages: 13

#13
Plese don't kill me anyone but...

I used Linux for 8 years on the desktop, FreeBSD for 2 and have now been using Windows 10 for 2 on my desktop and OS X on laptop for 4.

I think FreeBSD is the "worst" or most trouble and requires the most compromises, even more than Linux does. Perhaps because I have little time these days, gotten lazy and my life has changed but I'd rather not use my desktop computer than have it crippled by Linux or FreeBSD ever again.
 

aimeec1995

Active Member

Thanks: 13
Messages: 159

#14
I would like to find out because I'm worried one thing or freebsd is better for the desktop than linux if such a thread was moved then sorry and please understand for thanks
FreeBSD on the desktop is about as good as linux on the desktop was 10 years ago.
I still like it way more, though.
 

Russ Perkins

New Member

Thanks: 1
Messages: 17

#15
Plese don't kill me anyone but...

I used Linux for 8 years on the desktop, FreeBSD for 2 and have now been using Windows 10 for 2 on my desktop and OS X on laptop for 4.

I think FreeBSD is the "worst" or most trouble and requires the most compromises, even more than Linux does. Perhaps because I have little time these days, gotten lazy and my life has changed but I'd rather not use my desktop computer than have it crippled by Linux or FreeBSD ever again.
And yet you are here
 

Trihexagonal

Daemon

Thanks: 634
Messages: 1,200

#17
Plese don't kill me anyone but...

I used Linux for 8 years on the desktop, FreeBSD for 2 and have now been using Windows 10 for 2 on my desktop and OS X on laptop for 4.

I think FreeBSD is the "worst" or most trouble and requires the most compromises, even more than Linux does. Perhaps because I have little time these days, gotten lazy and my life has changed but I'd rather not use my desktop computer than have it crippled by Linux or FreeBSD ever again.
Not everyone is cut out for the red pill...



It's possible that you, my friend, are more suited for the blue pill.

 

OJ

Daemon

Thanks: 253
Messages: 1,038

#18
I think FreeBSD is the "worst" or most trouble and requires the most compromises, even more than Linux does.
Personal preference is totally cool, but apart from that, what you say doesn't make any sense to me. I use both and they both work out of the box. No work. Just use it. It is of course always possible to make work. :)
 

drhowarddrfine

Son of Beastie

Thanks: 974
Messages: 2,865

#19
I'll repeat what I always say. FreeBSD is a professional operating system for professionals and serious amateurs. Too many people come in here looking for an alternative to some other OS and want it to work the same or similar and easier. If that's their goal, they came here for all the wrong reasons unless they are a professional looking for a professional operating system. In which case, you can have everything you want in an OS.
 

stratacast1

Active Member

Thanks: 20
Messages: 185

#21
Do you have a count? I'd bet most don't. But it's not a FreeBSD problem directly. It's a problem getting someone to port it.

As I said. I'm a web developer and run a company with 10 developers and we don't use it either. But I've read, in the past, that people have gotten Nightly to work by just downloading and compiling it. It seems that, years ago, I did it myself but don't recall.
I know one of the biggest reasons Plasma isn't ported is because it is heavily dependent on systemd, so I can see why no one is all that interested in doing the job. I don't think I'd want to compile my web browser every morning :D for those reasons and others, Linux will remain my desktop OS, Windows for gaming, Mac OS X (if I can afford one again) for a good laptop OS to keep me in the loop of things and FreeBSD for my servers
 

Sensucht94

Well-Known Member

Thanks: 357
Messages: 374

#22
I'll repeat what I always say. FreeBSD is a professional operating system for professionals and serious amateurs. Too many people come in here looking for an alternative to some other OS and want it to work the same or similar and easier. If that's their goal, they came here for all the wrong reasons unless they are a professional looking for a professional operating system. In which case, you can have everything you want in an OS.
Personally, I feel kind of forced to disagree on that. There's nothing like 'professional OS for professionals' stated on the system's Main Page, nor in the Handbook, nor in the Forums.
I think you're the only one who keeps assessing that, hence this should be recognized as a personal point of view.
You could say instead that FreeBSD, being a solid professional system, is one of the best choices for professional and that would be correct.

I'm not a professional, I'm a common user, what I do in life has nothing to share with informatics and computers.

Although it's been years since I first tried FreeBSD, I signed up in that forum only recently. Why?

The handbook and the answered threads on the forums provided any info I needed in order to solve any doubt and work out any kind of problem.

This won't prevent me from asking something in future, if I won't be able to solve the problem by myself, and (provided that it won't be a stupid question) you, as a professional, will probably be able to teach me something, if you'll be that kind to answer.

Anyway, now I find myself really comfortable with FreeBSD, I love it and use it as my only OS on my desktop and on a old laptop. When I am with my sister's Mac, I use it as If it were BSD, with xorg+xfce+Darwin's macports instead quartz+aqua+apple's apps.

What's more, some friends of mine (not professionals) who used to run Linux, became interested in FreeBSD, after having seen on my pc, and ended up being very satisfied after they gave it a try.

On one hand I recon FreeBSD is not for beginners, whereas it ain't surely as user-friendly as Win/OS X/Debian-Mint-Ubuntu-Elementary
It's true as well that in order to avoid wasting time at the beginning, basical experience with command line and Unix-like systems is a precious advantage.

However on the other hand, if FreeBSD were that difficult to be professional-only, then Arch, Gentoo, Slackware, Suse, Fedora, CentOS, Manjaro, and many other Linux-Distros, as well as PC-BSD, MidnightBSD, DragonflyBSD, not forgetting Solaris' derivatives, should be all considered 'professional-only', since, for instance, I had harder times with Slack than with FreeBSD.

How much does it take to learn how to install Arch correctly and make it bootable with UEFI? Less than FreeBSD perhaps? Don't think so

Are all those OSes used just by professionals?

Before starting using Linux I used to run MS-DOS and, later on,windows Me as a child. Were those less 'professional'? For me not. I didn't have 'professional' parents to help,they didn't even know what a computer was, still I used it, I was given a possibility to learn, I had a lot of fun, and made my computer work

Then I decided to switch to Linux and installed Corel. Wasn't back then Linux too professional for a newbie? Has this prevented any DOS/Windows user from installing it during 00's?
And now that Corel and Red Hat do not exist any longer, do you expect me to use Ubuntu/Mint just because I'm no professional? I think most of people who used Linux for quite some time, if forced to deal with Ubuntu, would like to drop it off for something less easy, but hell, all the way better (my opinion).

Now I use FreeDOS for gaming and for running legacy software I like. I prefer it over dosbox and virtualbox. Isn't that too professional for you?

I think that FreeBSD is a perfect choice for everybody who does not expect things to be pre-packaged.
If I were called up to answer to 'which professional system is supposed to be for professionals only', I would speak of Windows Server with power shell as interface, or IBM's AIX, maybe OpenBSD but definitely not FreeBSD.

In my opinion that perspective of yours ('few but good') if shared by all developers Deamons and moderators, would cut off half of the FreeBSD community,, and hold back FreeBSD from spreading wider.
However that perspective might not be shared by everyone, and, therefore, there's no point in claiming it to be sacred truth
It's not different from the perspective of a veteran CS-GO player who flames newbies, without earning anything from that.
Curiosity, will to listen and to learn should be always appreciated. You're not obliged to read thoroughly threads you consider 'not professional', neither you have to feel forced to answer them
 

drhowarddrfine

Son of Beastie

Thanks: 974
Messages: 2,865

#23
I know one of the biggest reasons Plasma isn't ported is because it is heavily dependent on systemd
Well, there ya' go.

Sensucht94 If you read my earlier post, you would have seen I also say "and serious amateurs". The rest of your post is only things I agree with and often say myself so we are in agreement on everything.

and hold back FreeBSD from spreading wider.
To an extent, I would hope so. Already I have seen an influx of Linux people, for many reasons, who want FreeBSD to behave just like Linux and be the next XBox. What I would hope for, instead, is more of those professionals with the time and energy to contribute to FreeBSD to join the developers and make it better.
 

OJ

Daemon

Thanks: 253
Messages: 1,038

#24
Now I use FreeDOS for gaming and for running legacy software I like.
I just wanted to say that I'm also a DOS fan. I was around on the freedos forum when it was first being discussed and there was still no working version, so I'm quite familiar with it. Still, I prefer MS-DOS 3.21 or for every day use, 6.22. And yes, I do use it every day for very practical things. I'm not a gamer though. The reason I mention all this is because coming from DOS, and as an amateur, FreeBSD feels very comfortable.
 

Trihexagonal

Daemon

Thanks: 634
Messages: 1,200

#25
On one hand I recon FreeBSD is not for beginners, whereas it ain't surely as user-friendly as Win/OS X/Debian-Mint-Ubuntu-Elementary
It's true as well that in order to avoid wasting time at the beginning, basical experience with command line and Unix-like systems is a precious advantage.
The tutorial I wrote targets that minority, however small as it might be, and tedious for experienced users to read through:

I'm going to guide you though the process of getting a fully functional FreeBSD desktop up and running, complete with system files and security settings, step-by-step as if you've never used UNIX or the command line.
Beginners Guide - How To Set Up A FreeBSD Desktop From Scratch

I've been interested in FreeBSD since 1998 but having only used an Apple II and Windows at that point the install screens in the Handbook looked archaic and beyond my skill set at the time to set up. If there had been a tutorial that spelled it out step-by-step like I attempt to do I probably would have taken the plunge. I can usually figure things out for myself and rarely ask a question, but I no doubt would have been full of them then.

IMO it's counterproductive to attempt to deter or exclude new users and am not sure that's what the developers have in mind or say where their opinion lies on the subject.

It's a given that as TrueOS becomes more popular there will be an influx of people who want to try vanilla FreeBSD (PC-BSD is how I got here), that in the end will find Linux, or even Windows, preferable and decide to go back to it after some discord in the forums. Think of it as the growth pains that we as its users experience as FreeBSD grows.

On the other end of the spectrum lies stagnancy. How many times in the last few weeks have you read where someone said that FreeBSD is behind Linux in some form or fashion? I can point you to a few, one as recently as yesterday. But no matter what, it is never going to be for everybody nor should it try to be.

When you stop to think about it the analogy of the Red Pill and the Blue Pill isn't that far off.

The Red Pill implies Freedom. Freedom to choose and break free, and with that choice comes what can be the harsh reality that this may take a little work, but with that work you learn to bend the system to your will and become its master.

With the Blue Pill the system becomes the real Administrator with its forced updates, false sense of security (we know what's best for you) and comfy GUI, all the while you're being used, tracked and spoon fed by the system.
 
Top