Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 15 Jul 2004 13:09:37 -0400
From:      "Drews, Jonathan*" <DrewsJ@cder.fda.gov>
To:        "'Sigmascape1@cs.com'" <Sigmascape1@cs.com>, freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
Subject:   RE: FreeBSD Goals
Message-ID:  <4C88DC099E9AF945A6DA4D6FFA1865D17D742C@cdsx06.cder.fda.gov>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello Mitch and others:

 I use FreeBSD as a desktop system and I must say that it works very fine in
that role. IMHO the biggest benefit is the good integration of the userland.
That (to me) is really important. FreeBSD has the following good benefits:

1) A robust way to make PPP connections through userland-ppp. I think
FreeBSD's userland-ppp is better than what exists in Linux. I have used
userland ppp with serial, USB and PCMCIA modems. In all three cases it
worked very well.
2) The ports system handles software upgrades (and dependencies) much better
than the rpm system. Doing large updates (Gnome, Kde etc.) works better for
me in FreeBSD.
3) Larger software choice -- +11,000 ports.
4) FreeBSD has, in my experience, better security. Run this script on a
stock Linux install and see what happens:

$ cat <<! > /tmp/foo.sh
#!/bin/bash
$0 &
$0 &
!
$ chmod +x /tmp/foo.sh
$ /tmp/foo.sh

On FreeBSD, the process will be quietly terminated. On Linux, it froze the
computer, requiring a hard reboot.
http://lists.firepipe.net/pipermail/cwe-lug/2004-March/000999.html

5) USB scanning works well in FreeBSD.
6) FreeBSD's pf (and for that matter IPFW) are easier to configure and
maintain  then Linux' IP tables (IMHO).
7) Excellent documentation in the form of the handbook and the tutorials, at
OnLamp's FreeBSD basics.

 Just so you don't think I am bashing Linux (which is certainly good) I want
you to know that I used SuSE 6.4 through 9.0 inclusive. I switched to
FreeBSD about a year ago. When I look back, I think a lot of what ailed
Linux were poor userland integrations. This lack of userland integration is
still a problem today. Some of the more notable userland problems:

A) Auto mount in Mandrake.
B) Wvdial/Kinternet in SuSE.
C) gcc 2.96 (arguably this was a necessary step forward) in Mandrake and
RedHat.

 In closing I would like to mention that my parents( ages 86 and 89 ) use a
FreeBSD 4.9 Laptop. I say this to counter the notion that FreeBSD is
inherently hard to use or a poor desktop platform.

-----Original Message-----
From: Sigmascape1@cs.com [mailto:Sigmascape1@cs.com] 
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:23 AM
To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org
Subject: FreeBSD Goals


Hi,

I am not a huge poster to this mailing list, but I am interested in FreeBSD.
Generally speaking, is one goal of FreeBSD and its community, to make
FreeBSD as easy to use a mainstream Linux distro? I'm just curious. I see a
lot of potential for FreeBSD on the server side of things, but Linux and its
various distros are now making Linux easier to use on the front end of
things (client side) as well as being solid in the server department. Having
used SuSE 8 and 9, I can say Linux has now entered a new world of
'ease-of-use.'




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C88DC099E9AF945A6DA4D6FFA1865D17D742C>