Don't take this as an attack, as I assume you of course know that now, but just to emphasize: That's where the problems start
The only thing BSDs have in common with GNU/Linux systems is that both are "Unix-like" and attempt to comply to POSIX. And it's at times surprising how much of the behavior of some command line tools (IMHO especially with GNU, but also with BSD) goes way beyond POSIX 
No worries. Linux is a great gateway to unix, but it definitely takes some adjustment to move to BSD. Thankfully, most of the crowd who resented (looked down on?) LXers have been crowded out by more helpful, and almost tolerant folks who'll gently nudge these folks onto the correct path, so long as they're willing to learn and work at understanding. That said, there's no hope for the 'How come my nVidia MonsterStrobe 9000.x453, rev 29 2000 core GPU works fine with Arch, but won't composite properly in KDE 6 on FreeBSD" folks.Don't take this as an attack, as I assume you of course know that now, but just to emphasize: That's where the problems start
I was always pragmatic, GNU/Linux (in Debian's flavor) worked fine for me for a very long time and I wasn't interested in anything BSD at all, cause there was no need. I hate to say it, but it was the introduction of more and more poetterware that changed that ... pulseaudio was already a PITA, but when Debian introduced systemd, I really hit some annoying problems, and only then I started to look for alternatives ... so, the first FreeBSD version I ever looked at was 11-CURRENT (yep, I ignored the warnings about running -CURRENT, cause FreeBSD 10-RELEASE didn't support my graphics card back then) and just had a go.I love this analogy !!FreeBSD is to Fury and Ghost as Debian is to Mint and MX Linux.
Dragonfly is to FreeBSD what Devuan is to Debian.
FreeBSD is to NetBSD what Debian is to RedHat. It's not a perfect analogy, but it's mine
GNU is Not Unix...Don't take this as an attack, as I assume you of course know that now, but just to emphasize: That's where the problems start
I don't mind GhostBSD but the truly bizarre solution of choosing openRC as their init system defies logic.
Same here, plus bhyve means I don't need to deal with VirtualBox or QEMU wasting space on my drive. It's not that I dislike them, but considering all I need is a small-ish Linux VM to be able to run docker and some other things, bhyve with sysutils/vm-bhyve is more than adequate.
I wish I could use bhyve, too … But I need to be able to pass raw devices (in particular, a BD drive) to the guest. VirtualBox supports that, but bhyve doesn’t.
I was under the impression that most , if not all, devices would passthru. One only needs to collect the desired PCI code/numbers (e.g. via dmesg) and enter into loader.conf and the specific VM conf.
You can pass through a PCI device, but that doesn’t help me because I don’t want to pass through the SATA controller. That would be a bad idea. I only want to pass through the BD drive. VirtualBox lets me do that.
Agreed.
Interesting your comment, I would like a portable machine that recognizes BSD all the drivers and take full advantage of performance, for the reputation of failures that has the ThinkPad from a few years ago to the present would prefer one of the brand DELL with 500 GB or 1 TB of SSD or HDD.
Read the handbook: Chapter 10. Linux® Binary Compatibility
No, you can't. Although you can run various Linux binaries on FreeBSD the compatibility layer is far from perfect. Besides the kernel there are also various other considerations, like libraries. This is only for Linux. There's also an OpenSolaris compatibility layer, it's mainly used for ZFS. There used to be a System-V R4 layer too but it was removed with 12.0. With regards to Windows software you're limited to what emulators/wine is capable of. There is no OS-X/MacOS compatibility.
Basically, yes.
When a binary is executed, the kernel detects for which platform it was built (FreeBSD, Linux, …). If it is a non-native binary – i.e. not FreeBSD – two things happen: First, the kernel switches to an alternative set of system calls that implements the system calls of the binary’s target platform. Second, the location of file system paths is changed so that files are searched under /compat/<platform> first. If it doesn’t exist there, it is searched in the usual place, i.e. rooted at “/”.
Not, not all. Currently, compatibility layers exist for Linux 32bit and 64bit binaries. In the past there existed several others to execute SysV and BSD/OS binaries, but those have been removed because nobody used them anymore.
,for that I am trying OpenBSD) but the
PFPFWell, at some point, very old things need to be removed that get into the way of developing new features. This is especially true for things that don’t have a maintainer anymore, or that are difficult to maintain because none of the developers has hardware or software old enough to test the code in question. As a consequence, the code will rot and fail to work properly.
I disagree with some of this. The documentation is excellent, in my opinion (the FAQ and man pages are very comprehensive and accurate), and if you run Current, the application repository is pretty up-to-date and quite extensive. I am not a Theo de Raadt fan -- quite the opposite. I think that while he's clearly a major talent, he's a nasty piece of work. I've had my own run-ins with him and lost interest in the system because of him. But the system is undeniably good, in service of correctness and its security focus. It is definitely slower than Linux or any of the other BSDs, especially when you care about multi-core performance. But how fast is fast enough? Today's hardware is so fast that even a slow OS is often fast enough. Look at the prevalence of Python code in today's computing landscape. It's interpreted code, of course, but in a lot of situations it does the job.
You are raising a legitimate issue. I'm a DragonflyBSD fan, but when I look at the benchmarks vs FreeBSD and Linux, I wonder whether the project still makes sense.
In short, the only reason I can imagine for not using FreeBSD is that you get on so well with people using another BSD that you choose to use the same system as them to have an occasion to spend more time with them.
As a conclusion, I'd recommend you try them all to see where you feel the best.