FreeBSD to rethink target audience?

One thing we (FreeBSD community) need to do, is

We need to create FreeBSD art!!!

It must be smart and creative.

There are very few FreeBSD wallpapers, banners, pictures... etc available online....., most of them are pretty (if not very) old

It's mot enough just to take Beastie put it on some wallpaper and rename it to FreeBSD_Rocks.jpg

I believe FreeBSD art would help making FreeBSD more popular.

[but that's my thoughts, to bad my hands grow from wrong place, and i can make any art. That's why i'm learning C, in hope then soon i will start programming app for FreeBSD]
 
chrcol said:
I have felt since 5.x FreeBSD have spent too much time focusing on the desktop and thats why linux has made ground on the server side.

The 2 top complaints I heard from datacentres as to why they dont/stopped supporting FreeBSD.

1 - Hard to use installer.
2 - Fussy on hardware, hangs on bootloader are common.

My view on hardware compatability and drivers, well for a long time on realtek cards linux was better, the reason I got from FreeBSD when I queuried was its poor hardware so tough luck, rather than ok we will try and get our driver as good as linux driver. Too often the response is go out and buy Y hardware and drop X hardware and at times I feel as if FreeBSD dev's are sales men for companies like intel. Since 7.x tho things seem to be getting better again. In all honesty I think 5.x and 6.x should have all been beta releases and 7.x should have been the 5.x. The main mistake seems to be the insistance on releasing a new major version on a timescale rather than when its ready. Windows has a new major version every 4 years or so, and how long has it been since linux 2.6.x was launched?

Examples of my reasoning behind major versions been launched too quickly?

New features since 4.x

Proper SMP scaling
ULE scheduler
libthr threading library
PF firewall

All these throughout 5.x and 6.x were essentially beta, we had the debug.mpsafenet switch, ULE wasnt properly done until 7.x, libthr agan not default till 7.x , PF the only thing considered production ready before 7.x out that list. Uniprocessor support in 5.x and 6.x has been substandard, the reasons given were its not the future however I will say back uniprocessor is still the mainstream, multi processor machines are still the minority believe it or not and when 6.0 was released uniprocssor was over 80% of the hardware in use. In 7.x uniprocessor is at least better than 5.x and 6.x so glad some work has been done there.

What I would like to see is 7.x become a proper workhorse like 4.x was, lets have a long gap before 8.0 and 10 or so minor releases of 7.x refining the release branch so it gets rock solid and able to handle large ddos attacks like 4.11 could.

FreeBSD core strength was stability not features.
Click to expand...

I know I'm no developer, but I think something like this also. I got to use FreeBSD for real beginning with 6.0, and that time it was wow great. I had an old sparc64 that no linux made it work decent. 6.0 made it great, rock solid. I do like 7.X, and I hope it lives enough. I know current is getting many new stuff, so one way or another FreeBSD future for me will be good either way ... :)

none
 
You must be kidding.

Weinter said:
It is that FreeBSD doesn't support a lot of the hardware of my new AMD Puma platform laptop
It didn't support anything at all...
Click to expand...

So, your screen stayed black, the HDD wasn't spinning up and your USB peripherals weren't accessible?

Yeah, I thought so.

FreeBSD is a server OS. Servers don't do hibernation. They serve stuff. Part of this is staying available 99.9% of the time or more.

There's a proverb in the BSD community. I had it as a signature for a while. It goes like this:

Linux is for people who hate Windows. BSD is for people who love UNIX.

So, if you expect a desktop OS with bells and whistles, install Ubuntu on your AMD whatever notebook. That will also spare you of the troubles you're going to discover next, such as getting sound to work and finding out how to get write permissions on your DVD writer without being root.

I don't think you will get any sympathy for your notebook troubles here, as you wouldn't get tuning tips for your Honda Accord on a BMW M5 forum. So if you like BSD, go install PC-BSD and ask about your hibernation in their forums/mailing list. Someone might even care over there.
 
I didn't remember that part of the handbook. :) I do, however, remember that the tagline on the FreeBSD website is "The Power To Serve", as I do remember my own attempts at running FreeBSD (5 at that time) as my main desktop OS. It's not unfriendly, but it's picky at who its friends are. ;)

Notebook use obviously is very low priority, and that's good. While nothing like it existed back then, nowadays there's PC-BSD and DesktopBSD for those who want a rock-solid desktop OS that doesn't have kernel updates every two weeks. Personally, I don't understand the need for this PBI stuff as FreeBSD has excellent software management via ports and packages, but hey, to each his own. (And as I hear, you can still use the FreeBSD standard tools in PC-BSD.)
 
Anyway....
Laptops are next hot thing....
Once there were mainframes....
then PC and kind was introduced....

Why did ppl switched to desktop PC's? Why didn't they use mainframes...

about same thing is happening now.
Users are migrating from Destop PC's to laptops

I would love to run FreeBSD on my plaptop, but i can't
Well, thank god i have old box, that is still pretty capable :D

[my thoughts]


EDIT:

btw before that there were calculators and typewriters...
why not to stick to them?
 
bsddaemon said:
FreeBSD is a server OS. It just happens to run as a workstation OS rather well
Click to expand...

39832.gif


I've always viewed and used FBSD as a Server OS but Humoured myself a few years ago by putting it on a desktop but at the time it didn't suit my "Desktop" purpose because it was behind the times IRT hardware compared to linux (Video 3D,etc).
 
You already stated why i didn't want PC-BSD
thortos said:
Personally, I don't understand the need for this PBI stuff as FreeBSD has excellent software management via ports and packages, but hey, to each his own. (And as I hear, you can still use the FreeBSD standard tools in PC-BSD.)
Click to expand...

I like FreeBSD better because my aim is compile from source and add the juicy optimizations :e

And PC-BSD forums seriously don't really do hardware support...
It is like for people who don't read the FreeBSD handbook...
You should go take a look...then you know...

And ok I am sorry it works as in bootable but the following is not supported because it is new chipset
-Ethernet Card & Wifi Card the new Griffin RM-72 Processor also behave weirdly
The older laptop which got spoiled by the Acer tech works (almost everything including wifi)
But the new replacement laptop doesn't =(

I think for FreeBSD to act as a server OS will be like stabbing your foot afterall most server purchased comes with their own OS Pre-install
HP Servers = HP-UX
IBM Servers = AIX
Sun Blade Servers = SunOS
Assembled Servers = GNU\Linux & FreeBSD( Most people only know what is Linux never heard of freebsd =( )
Unless you buy the iXsystem servers ...FreeBSD
 
Weinter said:
From what I know Linux is making big progess in BOTH SERVER AND WORKSTATION what you are saying FreeBSD can only progress one way...
Click to expand...

Could you please elaborate on that progress.

I see failure in both area. On the desktop side after all that mambo-jambo crap Linux is holding less than 1% of the market share. Is that success for you? I can hear the laughs from Redmond about that one. They are million time more scared from piracy than from Linux. At least BSDs have never been advertised
as a desktop OS for wide masses. Even if you think of OS X as a
BSD derivative (despite Mach kernel) Apple computers have always
been a choice of a small elite (maybe as technically ignorant as Windows users) but never the less self proclaimed elite.
OS X market share has never exceeded 5% in my life time.

Lets go now to the Server market. Even though Linux has become
somewhat popular solution on the entry server level (file or mail server for a small academic department comes to mind) it completely unable to penetrate mid and high server range.
There are several reasons for it. I will state some.

1. Lack of proper enterprise support due to the too many distros. Yes, people who use OS for work are willing to pay and expect support. Even though RedHat and Novel have established as
the market leaders that fact that RedHat lost 80% of its market share in the past five years since it went proprietary. That could be hardly ensuring for a business that looks to last more that 5-10 years.

2. Interoperability. Different Linux distros are so different
that it is extremely difficult to deploy more than one distro at the time and take advantage of their most advanced features.
No Linux distro is good across the board.

3. Lack of trained Linux system admins. Jumping from one to another Linux distro hardly makes for the good system admin.
You have to stick with your guns for a long time to be good at
something.


Lets go now about more serious technical issues.

1. With the exception of SGI port of Linux, Linuxes in general are in terms of multithreading and 64 bits support on about the same level as proprietary Unixes of early 90s if not late eighties (of the last century).

2. Serious lack of support for time proven non i386 architectures. Linux support for both sparc64 and ppc is .
mediocre. Even though nobody denies popularity of the cheap
crappy i386 hardware the fact is that various RISKs architecture
still rule mission critical parts of network and wider computational infrastructure.

When it comes to serious game read my lips (Solaris, AIX, HP Unix).
 
Oko, it depends on the metric. Several sources estimate OS X marketshare to be nearing 10%. It was around 8% last time I checked in the summer.

I would like to know what relevance this thread poses to FreeBSD. Marketshare is not even a remotely decent metric of quality. Unix tradition stresses strong commitment to quality and stability. So, what does it matter if FreeBSD has a 5% marketshare in the server arena, but that it has never disappointed its users. I, for one, have never been disappointed, and I came from Linux. I've only ever liked Debian, Fedora, and Red Hat. Migrating from Gentoo after three years to FreeBSD was a welcome breath of fresh air! Also, I don't by the hardware bit. FreeBSD should support quality hardware with quality drivers as it is doing, not crappy hardware with crappier drivers. Also, if you're a FreeBSD user, then build systems with FreeBSD in mind. After all, Unixes have been historically tied to hardware, which is a relatively good strategy for limiting bugs. Also, remember that Sun and Apple have done great things for FreeBSD and BSD in general by helping out with development and such. Mac OS X is a derivative of FreeBSD that's synced with FreeBSD from time to time. So long as Mac OS X lives, FreeBSD will live too. If any of this comes out of fear of BSD dying, then think again.

Oko, I agree with you about the proprietary Unixes. Majority of mainframes still run Unix. Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, and Tru64 and OpenServer to a lesser extent are kings in that segment. Technological innovation doesn't happen on Linux, it happens on Unix. A lot of companies that tried to migrate from Solaris to Linux ended up reverting because of maintenance problems. So, Unix is holding up well and BSD still has its place in all of that.
 
PC-BSD and DesktopBSD both have FreeBSD under their hood (both 7.1-PRERELEASE). I like the idea of a more simple desktop-OS with a "real" FreeBSD underneath and the possibility to use it's advantages if I'd like to.
Both variants mainly reduce configuration effort and complexity, which is for sure a big advantage for desktop-users.

For the success of PC-BSD and DesktopBSD the hardware support for new "consumer" hardware is crucial, and there both systems rely on the hardware support of FreeBSD. So delegating the hardware support to them is wrong.

I would love to see FreeBSD (or its descendants) getting stronger on the desktop while staying strong on the server.

How many of us earn money with FreeBSD (I'm not)? I guess that most of them use FreeBSD on servers and only secondary as desktop-OS. IMHO this where the effort should go.

mousaka
 
Weinter said:
I think FreeBSD has to rethink their objectives in order to expand their marketshare
Click to expand...
Marketshare is only important if you are a commercial entity.
Even though FreeBSD is used in many commercial products, the FreeBSD Project isn't a commercial entity.

The FreeBSD Project exists only to scratch the itches of the FreeBSD developers, and the companies who uses FreeBSD in their products.

Therefore, the goals of the FreeBSD Project will not necessarily be aligned to the goals of the rest of the world, or whatever any potential users wants or think is "right".

Also, FreeBSD has too few developers to fulfil the users' wishlist for new features.
And all the current developers are busy already.

If you, as a user / potential user of FreeBSD really care about any missing features in FreeBSD, only one course of action remains for you; learn how the develop and become a FreeBSD developer too.


I do not write this to be mean - this is just the way things are.
Whatever your decision is, I wish you good luck and happiness in your future.
 
Guys, FreeBSD is what you make out of it!
 
none said:
I do like FBSD on desktop, but some things makes me not use it. but as soon as these problems quit existing, I'll have FBSD on it :)

none
Click to expand...

I dual boot Slackware and FreeBSD because at this point in my learning curve I can't make FreeBSD do everything that I can make Slackware do. This is not a criticism of FreeBSD! I've dabbled with FreeBSD since 5.x, but, have not given my full attention to it.
I'm continuing to learn about FreeBSD and am enjoying the journey immensely. I am excited that FreeBSD 7.1 has better Flash support than 7.0. :) I love FreeBSD 7.0 with KDE 3.5.8. :)
 
bsddaemon said:
Pass your complaint to the vendors. Its your vendor who doesnt care to release/write your hardware's drivers. It is not FreeBSD's fault. Full stop!
Click to expand...

I agree.
I purchased thinkpad T61, because it is well compatibility... Drivers support FreeBSD perfectly
 
Weinter said:
That is were you are wrong
For FreeBSD to succeed it MUST WIN MARKET SHARE not only on Servers (too little) but on DESKTOP and LAPTOPS as well
Click to expand...

How do you define success? Do you define it as where an OS becomes mainstream? Like Windows?

Really, if marketshare is that important to you, just use Windows so you can brag about how successful it is because it has over 80% marketshare.
 
james89 said:
How do you define success? Do you define it as where an OS becomes mainstream? Like Windows?

Really, if marketshare is that important to you, just use Windows so you can brag about how successful it is because it has over 80% marketshare.
Click to expand...

I am not talking about marketshare to brag
Marketshare is high when more percentage of the world's desktop using freebsd
I am talking about market share gives freebsd developers some commanding power and advantage
Hardware manufacturers will have to consider them before rolling out new stuff
Hardware manufacturers will have to develop drivers for FreeBSD not the other way round
This will cut them some slack and give them time to do other stuff like code optimization
They will also be more willing to reveal their chipset codes
Isn't that a win-win situation?

Unless you feel BSD is a "elite" os that should be available to some special few only

As much as I would like to say PC-BSD is helping the development but sadly no...
They only supporting user-interface they are not helping driver development they are dependent on FreeBSD for new drivers =(
 
Sundj said:
I agree.
I purchased thinkpad T61, because it is well compatibility... Drivers support FreeBSD perfectly
Click to expand...

ThinkPads and Latitudes are expensive...:\

If I am working i would buy them too...
 
Oko said:
Could you please elaborate on that progress.

I see failure in both area. On the desktop side after all that mambo-jambo crap Linux is holding less than 1% of the market share. Is that success for you? I can hear the laughs from Redmond about that one. They are million time more scared from piracy than from Linux. At least BSDs have never been advertised
as a desktop OS for wide masses. Even if you think of OS X as a
BSD derivative (despite Mach kernel) Apple computers have always
been a choice of a small elite (maybe as technically ignorant as Windows users) but never the less self proclaimed elite.
OS X market share has never exceeded 5% in my life time.

Lets go now to the Server market. Even though Linux has become
somewhat popular solution on the entry server level (file or mail server for a small academic department comes to mind) it completely unable to penetrate mid and high server range.
There are several reasons for it. I will state some.

1. Lack of proper enterprise support due to the too many distros. Yes, people who use OS for work are willing to pay and expect support. Even though RedHat and Novel have established as
the market leaders that fact that RedHat lost 80% of its market share in the past five years since it went proprietary. That could be hardly ensuring for a business that looks to last more that 5-10 years.

2. Interoperability. Different Linux distros are so different
that it is extremely difficult to deploy more than one distro at the time and take advantage of their most advanced features.
No Linux distro is good across the board.

3. Lack of trained Linux system admins. Jumping from one to another Linux distro hardly makes for the good system admin.
You have to stick with your guns for a long time to be good at
something.


Lets go now about more serious technical issues.

1. With the exception of SGI port of Linux, Linuxes in general are in terms of multithreading and 64 bits support on about the same level as proprietary Unixes of early 90s if not late eighties (of the last century).

2. Serious lack of support for time proven non i386 architectures. Linux support for both sparc64 and ppc is .
mediocre. Even though nobody denies popularity of the cheap
crappy i386 hardware the fact is that various RISKs architecture
still rule mission critical parts of network and wider computational infrastructure.

When it comes to serious game read my lips (Solaris, AIX, HP Unix).
Click to expand...

I don't mean to be offensive or anything but if you refer to this
You will find a whooping 77% running LINUX
I mean like would they run their ultra expensive super computer on a lousy OS?
 
tingo said:
If you, as a user / potential user of FreeBSD really care about any missing features in FreeBSD, only one course of action remains for you; learn how the develop and become a FreeBSD developer too.
Click to expand...

Cannot agree more
 
Personnally i m using FreeBSD as a Desktop OS on my Laptop wich is a Toshiba , i achieve to do same thing i was doing on Linux Debian and Windows XP before , even playing Warcraft III (thank to wine and nvidia driver)
I don't see where is the problem.
 
They want it, they can provide it.

mousaka said:
For the success of PC-BSD and DesktopBSD the hardware support for new "consumer" hardware is crucial, and there both systems rely on the hardware support of FreeBSD. So delegating the hardware support to them is wrong.
Click to expand...

No, quite the opposite. If they come along and say "here, we provide you with a desktop variant of FreeBSD", they cannot lean back and go "OK, FreeBSD devs, now you give our users what they want". After all, those users who *are* interested in running FreeBSD on modern notebooks and with cheap hardware are *right there in the DesktopBSD/PC-BSD support channels* and can contribute, and if only through giving feedback on what they want and testing of modifications.

As somebody else said, there's few FBSD developers, and they're busy as it is. The very least the PC-BSD and DesktopBSD people can do is contribute to the FreeBSD code base, making it more desktop/notebook-friendly. I don't know if they do, but I sure know they should. Otherwise they're just leeches.

For example all the manpower that went into the pointless PBI infrastructure could as well have been used to implement a graphical ports/packages manager and contribute it back to FreeBSD. This way everyone would have benefitted. As it is, only PC-BSD users "benefit", and how starting a parallel software universe is a benefit to anyone is still up for discussion. For all I know they could be distributing trojans with all applications, because I cannot verify those proprietary binary files one way or the other.

mousaka said:
I would love to see FreeBSD (or its descendants) getting stronger on the desktop while staying strong on the server.
Click to expand...

Yes, me too. I also was delighted when DesktopBSD and PC-BSD started their work, but the lack of manpower shows. I'm not contributing to them myself, so I won't complain, but I observe that given more love, they could really give Ubuntu a serious beating.
 
Almindor said:
That's a very close minded thing to say. Just because certain front-ends chosen for the EEE are.. let's say "simpler" doesn't mean it has anything to do with Linux.

And if you constructed a "user's laptop with <linux|freeBSD>" you'd end up with same thing anyways. The user wouldn't even know what's under the hood, they'd just see KDE/Gnome/Xfce.

NOTE: I'm currently running FreeBSD/amd64 on 1 year old laptop with no problems. But I wouldn't recommend it to most people.
Click to expand...

Wrong, I'm not badmouthing Linux per se or the simple desktop but they did a lousy job in implementing Linux on the hardware. Xandros e.g. is PITA, UbuntuEEE/DebianEEE is far better and easy upgradable even with a simple interface (UbuntuEEE) by beginners (btw. where did I mention the interface??). By the way, I'm using such a nice mobile device (Asus EEE900A). So in the end for most buyers Windows on top of those devices is the better choice than the delivered Linux (Xandros - old and barely upgradable).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top