BSD vs. Linux (2005) • Hacker News Board

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#251

Post by 872382372 » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 2:04 PM UTC

wtbob wrote: post #229

8183138921 wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is wrong with beastie? Unlike backwards religious fundamentalists, the cute little devil hasn't harmed a single person.

> Unlike backwards religious fundamentalists, the cute little devil hasn't harmed a single person. Even if one doesn't believe in the Devil, surely it seems in poor taste to use as a mascot a mythological creature who is reputed to be the source of every single evil, cruel, horrible thing in all of history. It's almost as bad as naming a piece of encryption software 'felony.'

Both Christians and Muslims have been a huge source of actual (vs. childish imaginary) evil over the past 2000 years. Anyone who takes the devil seriously should stick to reading Harry Potter.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#252

Post by michael_h » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 2:05 PM UTC

vivin wrote: post #5

I was a long-time FreeBSD user. Started using it in college and continued for a long time. I started using Linux because I had bought myself a new laptop and BSD didn't recognize the wifi card. I continued using FreeBSD at home for a few more years on my webserver before ultimately moving to dreamhost (I just didn't have the time to keep maintaining my own server). I like using Linux, but I still miss the predictabil…

> Linux definitely feels more "organic" and "grown" whereas FreeBSD seems like it was architected and planned out.

This is 'The Cathedral and the Bazaar'. I've often seen the phrase used to contrast Microsoft/Apple with 'open source in general', but it's this right here: a fully integrated and designed system contrasted with an organically created system. Which approach is better is up for discussion.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#253

Post by Natanael_L » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 2:14 PM UTC

behnamoh wrote: post #170

Something I don't understand about FreeBSD is why they use the evil daemon for the logo? Whatever story behind it, I just think there are many other alternatives they could use as the logo.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daemon_(classical_mythology)

Also described as neutral forces of nature, and in other ways. Not always as persons, often as if they were mechanical.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#254

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 2:15 PM UTC

VLM wrote: post #210

vertex-four wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people, otoh, enjoy playing games, watching videos, that sort of thing. Some people even do work that's dependent on the graphics card. Just because you use your computer for a very minimal amount of tasks doesn't mean everyone else does.

Everybody does that stuff in the browser now a days, which works fine in freebsd.

[deleted]

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#255

Post by effie » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 2:16 PM UTC

Filligree wrote: post #213

terminalcommand wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I stuck with linux for many years for the very same reason. The solution that worked for me was getting an SSD. Now, I always have a debian VM working in seamless mode. Ctrl+alt+t opens a terminal window, all linux dev tools work without a flow. With an SSD there is absolutely no lag. Virtual desktops in Win10 and snapping with win+arrow keys, eliminate the need for a linux DE. Plus you can use Adobe products, Visual…

There is a VM that supports seamless mode for Linux? Tell me more. Which one?

Virtualbox has so-called 'seamless' mode, in which the X11 windows from VM running on Windows host appear as separate windows in the Windows desktop. However, they only appear separate; they don't have separate panel button and they are not directly reachable via alt+tab. One needs to switch to VM first, then use keyboard shortcut set up in VM to access them.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#256

Post by joeyrobert » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 2:19 PM UTC

I remember checking out http://over-yonder.net/ after being linked from Slashdot circa 2006. I always have a soft spot for the "Homepage" link on Slashdot. I was impressed with his resume generator at the time: https://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/resume

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#257

Post by effie » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 2:24 PM UTC

hiram112 wrote: post #108

_wdzx wrote: post #86

> I like FreeBSD, and I use it as a server OS and on a NAS box but you only need look at https://wiki.freebsd.org/Graphics to understand that if the "Linux Desktop" is a joke compared to MacOS and Windows then the "FreeBSD Desktop" is even more so. I've never heard anything good about the "MacOS desktop" and I'm pretty sure that the "windows desktop" is far behind the "linux desktop"(plugins, performance, menus etc.)…

Linux on the desktop is still full of issues that were solved by Windows and Mac a decade ago. Fonts still look like crap (Ubuntu is an exception), and even with patches there are still problems with Java, old GTK libs, etc. I could care less about games, MS Office, a d a lot of other things that are deal breakers for some, but I have tried Linux on the desktop and it is still lacking.

My experience with fonts is the opposite; in Win 7 the letters are always tattered and manifest some color distortions around the letter edges; no matter what I do with Cleartype settings, both in browser and other programs such as Outlook. In Debian with Xfce or Gnome, the letters look much better, smoother and almost no color distortions apparent. I do not know if it is because of different font or different rendering (hinting) algorithm, but I never saw text representation on Windows be as good as on my Debian.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#258

Post by mac01021 » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 2:27 PM UTC

This seems like it was written a decade or so ago. I don't know how much of this has changed in that time.

It's well written and informative, though.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#259

Post by krakensden » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 2:28 PM UTC

roblabla wrote: post #220

vetinari wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using a Linux machine (Ubuntu+X11+nvidia+Kodi) as my HTPC for years. What's so sucky about it that I didn't notice during that time? No tearing, no artifacts, no crashes.

If you're using the nouveau drivers, everything's fine, but you don't get hardware acceleration. That means no games, but mostly tearing-free rendering, and no artifacts. The nvidia proprietary drivers is probably what's causing problems.

Nouveau has had hardware acceleration for years, although it has been desktop focused, not game focused.

Re: BSD vs. Linux (2005)

#260

Post by tobik » Tue, Jul 05, 2016, 2:32 PM UTC

eeZi wrote: post #249

Note that most BSDs (with the notable exception of OpenBSD, of course) lack modern anti-exploitation features like ASLR. FreeBSD is working on it, but it took surprisingly long.

NetBSD has had support for ASLR since 2009 (NetBSD 5.0), but they only enabled it recently by default: https://mail-index.netbsd.org/source-changes/2016/04/10/msg0...