BSD is dying

[Frank Shute]

On Thu, Aug 04, 2005 at 10:36:30AM +0100, Gerald Davies wrote:
>
> On 8/4/05, Frank Shute :
> > 
> > Have you ever had a look at Linux mailing lists & newsgroups?! They're
> > stuffed full of trolls & lamers & people reading tea-leaves (the GPL)
> > and giving their interpretation.
> > 
> > We're the model of sanity in comparison :)
> > 
> 
> frank, i don't often post, but as mentioned i've enjoyed this thread -
> i did wonder what had happened to all the subscribers :)
> 
> you mention some of the problems with linux, but then the thread is
> about why bsd is dying and therefore it doesn't really make sense. 
> you're kind of preaching to the converted as most users on this list
> will be advocates of bsd. 

I didn't mean to preach to the converted, I wanted to draw comparisons
between BSD and Linux.

It's my observation that the fundamentals of bsd are in a lot better
shape than Linux and nobody is saying that Linux is dying.

> if linux has so many problems then why are
> people using it?  

Linux has the mindshare, it's not that it's better.

> i don't think you can say that so many people have
> it wrong - to me it's just different :)

I think a lot of people have it wrong! Crikey, there are huge numbers
running XP - they're wrong too but for different reasons ;)

> 
> surely, the problems you mention will arise due to the sheer number of
> linux users.  if users keep migrating and/or starting out with linux
> or osx then your model of sanity in the bsd world (aside from osx)
> won't exist for very long.  OTOH, i started out with linux and then
> started using bsd for specific tasks :)

I don't think it's a case of sheer numbers, it's more a case of having
sane development on a limited number of platforms. I think FreeBSD's
development will scale.

Sure, as it grows there will be more trolls & lamers but that's just
life unfortunately.

> i'm not sure exactly what has to change with things like freebsd - as
> mentioned the license, the development, etc.  if these things changed
> then bsd would just become another linux :)  it's a tough one.  i
> haven't looked too much into what apple did, but i would be
> interested.

I looked into what Apple have done because I was interested in running
Darwin on a mac mini.

I subscribed to one of the Darwin mailing lists (Darwinports) and I
was frankly unimpressed.

There were a lot of stupid buggers on there flaming Jordan Hubbard for
being clueless etc. I posted politely suggesting that they were being
silly, wasting bandwidth and should conserve their energies for
sensible battles.

This was greeted by some other silly bugger (the mailing list
"manager") saying that he'd sort out the "infrastructure" so people
like me couldn't post!

To compound that, nobody posted back saying that such a suggestion for
an "open" project was absurd. At that point I abandoned any enthusiasm
I had for running Darwin (or OSX for that matter) and unsubscribed.

Compare that to the FreeBSD mailing lists were I've seen the lead
developers take time out to answer newbies questions...in detail.

> 
> perhaps you need to figure out how to solve the bsd problem rather
> than the linux one!

My contention is that FreeBSD doesn't have a problem!

> 
> and yes i do want a pretty mac as a desktop :D
> 

I don't. I want to run X and have any bug reports in applications
taken seriously even if I'm not some guru Darwin developer. Yes, X
stinks but it's a smell I've become accustomed to :)

Cost also rules it out and I'm certainly not buying hardware with a
Fritz chip if I can possibly help it.

My next box is a bottom end Celeron built by a local builder for
peanuts...running FreeBSD of course. Maximum bang for my bucks!


-- 

 Frank 


echo "f r a n k @ e s p e r a n c e - l i n u x . c o . u k" | sed 's/ //g'

                      --->PGP keyID: 0x10BD6F4B<---