A hobbyist.
. We can't read minds and figure out "what you want to do" and conversely what "you don't want to do" with an operating system.
A:\>Geek does not imply coding skills. You could be a comic book geek for example.
Its taught in college IT classes these days, so it is becoming quite mainstream for those likely to dabble with Linux / etc.
Same as always. It will provide good documentation so you can improve your skills to get the most out of a UNIX-like operating system.
Well .. really that depends on YOUYou were like: "OH MY GOD ! THIS IS SOOOOOOO COOL !!!" and you would start hacking away. (Maybe) you next typed "DIR" at the A:\> prompt and "suddenly" saw files on your floppy disk. And THEN you thought - WOW! "There are like files of data on my floppy disk!" And your system had 384K bytes of RAM memory and, damn! that is a lot of RAM memory! Who needs 640K of RAM? That must just be for those "power users". Now days everyone is like "Well, I can't run the latest and greatest AI software on FreeBSD -- so forget it!". Or "There is this Windows only app that 'only runs on Windows' and doesn't run on FreeBSD -- so forget it." Where I think you might find value is FreeBSD is that all of the OLD software that you used to use -- is still here and working very well. You mentioned PDFS? I am currently reading an extremely long PDF manual (hundreds of pages long) using xpdf(1) to read it, and that works waaaayyyyyy more marvelously than using PDF readers on other systems. We have the latest GIMP, Libre Office, Wine and all kinds of things. Where do you want to go today?Code:A:\>
Ilovehotdog is, obviously, able to do all those things. The question was whether or not FreeBSD would be the OS that provided an out of the box experience, that allowed the plain john/jane user (non tech, non hobbyist, etc) to do all of those things.
Hey, I use FreeBSD to play video games. You don't have to have windows to do that.
. Well, I meant people where the only reason they have a computer at all is to play games.
Yeah, the non technical users for sure. Of course the bar is pretty low for reading the handbook. But that is a bit too much effort for most computer users. PS4 is a good option as well. It's a solid FreeBSD system for gaming.
If you are an hobbyst user, who want to know how their OS is operating, FreeBSD is a good choice because it is well documented, and simpler to grasp respect modern Linux that is continosly changing. For the same reason is a good choice also for advanced admins, because it is robust, configurable, and predicable, unlike Linux, where sometime it becomes out of control.
I don't know my kids computers all run FreeBSD. I switched everything over 3 years ago last month. I think it's a relative scenario. My kids are growing up with experience using a solid system that is easy to learn and read about.
Hey, I use FreeBSD to play video games. You don't have to have windows to do that.
Actually games have improved a lot with the latest wine.
Sorry. Regular users use the base system. That's why it is called the base system. Desktop users need a DE or GUI.
I see political or ethical or "like" reasons as not something that needs to be supported. If FreeBSD only exists to cater to folks who have strong political opinions about Bill Gates, Steve Jobs (or Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos ...), or who have paranoid fears that Apple, Google, Microsoft and the NSA are spying on them, then FreeBSD is no longer needed. Similarly, if people only install FreeBSD because they don't have the $$$ to pay for a better operating system, that won't work, since the economics is just not there.
There was at least 10 or 20 years of graphics on Unix-style systems before X became dominant. And on other early workstation operating systems. Neither the Xerox Alto (first GUI-based system) nor Digital's VAXstation line used Unix (the VAXes could run Ultrix or BSD, but usually ran VMS with some graphics application or a windowing system (I think that was called VWS). There was also lots of people using Evans&Sutherland display hardware with backend Unix computers.
I spent the last 30 years in Silicon Valley writing software, and researching how to build better systems and better software. I must have been reasonably successful at it, given the size of my paycheck. I very much object to calling it "corporate crap". While none of the software I wrote was ever intended to be used by consumers (and only a vanishingly small fraction is available in source form, or open sourced), I think much of it does an excellent job at its task.
Anti-corporation is too broad to mean something. I have fundamental problems with software not improving things but limiting the user to create a market. It's why everybody uses apps on phones. A smartphone is a computer. Apps are not computer programs. Everybody uses it because ARM programs are no "user business." Translate as "do everything without profit because it's invented 30 years ago"
