What makes BSD stand out as its own system? I’ve been thinking about installing it in a new computer mainly for reading but I don’t know much about it.
I’m going to get crucified for this… for a desktop end-user it’s basically Linux with completely different syntax, lesser hardware compatibility and limited support channels.
I am certainly not going to crucify you for it. While FreeBSD is a fantastic operating system, its hardware support is lacking.
I really wish it was more popular. The userspace feels way more cohesive and the GNUisms of some Linux utilities is annoying sometimes.
It’s actually amazing they got this much hardware support. Heck, they even have Nvidia driver support. It could’ve been worse.
I do as well but FreeBSD made a lot of self-inflicted wounds. OpenBSD on the other hand runs surprisingly well on a variety of hardware. It won’t run well on the absolute latest but one or two generations behind it works gangbusters.
Do you have recommendations for where to get started with OpenBSD? The only BSD distro(?) I have gotten working with my hardware (Thinkpad X1 gen9, M1 Mac) is Nomad.
Simply get started using the OpenBSD FAQ. I think the Gen9 Thinkpad X1 should work. I just don’t know if it uses NVIDIA crap. If it does, you’re shit outta luck. As for the first generation Apple silicon, I don’t know how feature complete OpenBSD is on that platform.
that’s the catch though: it’s more cohesive because it’s not popular… people work and design and finesse it into a standard… linux however is popular so has a lot of opinions going into it! and that reinforces itself: it has a lot of stuff so that makes it popular and it’s popular so that means it has a lot of stuff!
BSD is great for what it’s great for and Linux is good for… pretty much everything
It’s because one of its tenets is POLA (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_least_astonishment). I use it for every server I run (4 physical, 37 ‘jailed’). Desktop it’s “OK” and can be hit and miss with a lot of hardware, I’ll admit it. It works on my laptop perfectly, and on my desktop generally.
Check out Chimera Linux
No that’s 100% the standard take. FreeBSD is a fantastic operating system but it doesn’t make sense as a daily driver for a personal computer
And less supported software! Open-source programs can often be compiled for FreeBSD but many closed-source and some open-source software won’t work in FreeBSD. There is the Linuxulator, which is basically Wine but for Linux programs on FreeBSD but it doesn’t have perfect Linux software support yet.
What’s the benefit in other circumstances?
It’s rock solid. It also has a heavy emphasis on security. Numerous high-end network routers and security devices use it as the base operating system. Darwin, the open source foundation of macOS is also derived from it.
It’s great for certain use-cases that don’t require a lot of hardware support. But don’t go trying to use it on your laptop.
I like using FreeBSD, the setup feels a lot nicer and more coherent than Linux in a lot of ways. I mainly tried it for native zfs.
The only downside is that nobody knows it exists so I have to compile things myself a lot or even patch it to get it to compile.
I use FreeBSD for my website and I’m actually pretty happy with it, the simplicity is a strong selling point.
It does feel sometimes like the documentation is written with a lot of assumed knowledge though, which makes it difficult to know what terms to use to find what you’re looking for… e.g. figuring out how to do major version upgrades did not feel straightforward.
It’s worth messing around with! OpenBSD, too.
It will certainly deepen my knowledge about operating systems. Messing with alternatives to grub and all that.
Not sure about the BSDs, but for Linux you don’t actually need GRUB anymore these days. On modern (i.e. UEFI) systems, you can boot the kernel directly as an EFI binary (this is known as EFISTUB booting).
I like it, for the most part. Obviously you need to check to see if your hardware is supported, but it’s a good OS. It’s stable, has neat features like boot environments, and it with pkg and the ports tree you can have newer versions of software. Also, they don’t make changes to the OS for the sake of it, or because one person or group wants it. They make change with a clear plan in my mind. Sometimes that means features land later in FreeBSD, but they’re implemented more thoughtfully imo.
OpenBSD and NetBSD are also cool projects in their own right.
It’s so old and rigid. But it’s stable and worth consideration. I put it in a similar camp as Debian. That said, I haven’t used it in years so I don’t really know the current state of things.
OpenBSD is my go to for super-security though.
I’ve definitely heard of it!
I wish I could figure that out. I’ve tried FreeBSD on my laptop, but Bluetooth wouldn’t work, I couldn’t install Signal, and basic apps I use daily are not available on FreeBSD. I’m not sure who uses it or what they use it for.
afaik it’s still very good for things like DNS and a lot of different server stuff. its more minimal than linux, so has a smaller attack surface and possibly slightly better performance?
i don’t think its particularly useful for generic uses though… if you know you need it, you know you need it. if you don’t need it, you’d be better off with an OS that performs all the things you want it to adequately
Its a base layer of several other, really good operating systems but I wouldnt use it by itself. If you want something lightweight just install ubuntu or mint.
Ubuntu and Mint are relatively heavyweight Linux distros, but still much lighter than Windows.
True. But theyre also good starter distros I think.
Of all the operating systems I’ve heard about it’s one of them.
Linux on my selfhosted system with email and DNS, FreeBSD on my 2nd system. 2ndary DNS and hot standby for emails. Best of both worlds. You may hack the primary, but not both.
It’s too niche to be discussed in a generic asklemmy thread.
