From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jul 18 08:05:43 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAEC3106566C for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:05:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Received: from mx02.qsc.de (mx02.qsc.de [213.148.130.14]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 757368FC14 for ; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:05:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from r55.edvax.de (port-92-195-103-124.dynamic.qsc.de [92.195.103.124]) by mx02.qsc.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id E81CE1D93F; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 10:05:41 +0200 (CEST) Received: from r55.edvax.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by r55.edvax.de (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id p6I85fEm001653; Mon, 18 Jul 2011 10:05:41 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from freebsd@edvax.de) Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 10:05:41 +0200 From: Polytropon To: Joshua Isom Message-Id: <20110718100541.a5105216.freebsd@edvax.de> In-Reply-To: <4E23D7E7.7060602@gmail.com> References: <20110717071059.25971662@scorpio> <4E22DFE9.7050007@pathscale.com> <201107172016.30727.lobo@bsd.com.br> <4E23989F.7010701@gmail.com> <4e242fab.s4vpgxxZEUq0LFDq%perryh@pluto.rain.com> <4E23D7E7.7060602@gmail.com> Organization: EDVAX X-Mailer: Sylpheed 2.4.7 (GTK+ 2.12.1; i386-portbld-freebsd7.0) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Lennart Poettering: BSD Isn't Relevant Anymore X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: Polytropon List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 08:05:43 -0000 On Mon, 18 Jul 2011 01:51:19 -0500, Joshua Isom wrote: > On 7/18/2011 8:05 AM, perryh@pluto.rain.com wrote: > > Joshua Isom wrote: > >> On 7/17/2011 6:16 PM, Mario Lobo wrote: > >>> On Sunday 17 July 2011 10:13:13 C. Bergstr??m wrote: > >>>> I hope gnome does [go Linux-only].. Maybe then more > >>>> people would forget about it and focus on making KDE better ;) > > ... > >> What about enlightenment? > > > > For us old-timers :) > > > > What's the advantage of any of these "desktop environments" (Gnome, > > KDE, enlightenment, Xfce) over ordinary X11 with (say) FVWM2 or TWM? > > Certainly there are some useful apps that, for better or worse, are > > built with gtk or the KDE toolkit, but what does the full-blown > > environment really contribute (other than bloat)? > > Desktop options are why linux has grown so well. If gnome and KDE > didn't exist, linux wouldn't have gotten the market share it did. Again, we see a common mixture of market share (who buys a product or support for it), usage share (who uses a typically free product) and mind share (who knows about typically free alternatives). In terms of market share, well... it's hard to judge about a system that doesn't _primarily_ show up in unit sales. > Desktop environments are a foot in the door technique for server > environments. Although it sounds quite stupid, I have to agree. People do want on the server what they know from the desktop. And the way _to_ the desktop is primarily reached through GUI and applications. Yes, it's not the OS that counts, it's the software that allows you to get work done, and of course, it's also the look & feel of that software. People are different in their preference regarding the last aspect. Some like big desktop environments like KDE, others like things like WindowMaker. Some urgently need a desktop full of icons, others prefer a system that stays out of their way and lets them work. Some need good keyboard support, others don't even touch the many complicated keys with the strange signs. This differences among users is also differences among administrators, those who have to run the servers. Sadly, those are often _not_ the people DECIDING about the servers. This is mainly a task of suit-wearing (l)users who believe in the oh holy marketing church. All the numbers Poettering is using to "prove" his claim come from the field of economy, of companies, of market share. Other aspects are mostly left out. A common problem is bloat, as it has correctly been mentioned above. Some say that bloat isn't bloat - it's _neccessary_ for modern application development. However, this is highly debatable. :-) If you see the "race conditions" in software development, where systems get better and software gets worse, you end up with the same "overall usage speed" (boot the machine, start the OS, start the program, interact with the program and so on): hardware resources ++ overall speed = ------------------------ = const. software requirements ++ And it's even "more const." if you are willing to agree that those who make up the majority of "market share" are typically users who treat their plentycore tenmelonhundred GHz and endless disks PCs as WORSE TYPEWRITERS! :-) In this regards, most mainstream Linusi (let alone "Windows") could never show impressive improvements. For example, you update FreeBSD and non-bloated applications on the _same_ hardware. What do you get? Faster "overall speed": System comes up faster, programs run faster. Doing the same on bloated systems, "overall speed" gets ssssslllloooowwwwweeerrrr. In order to maintain CONSTANT speed, you need to update your hardware. You need to do it regularly. If you don't do it, you're out of business soon. (This is one of the aspects that contribute to how "market share" works - this constant renewal of otherwise fully functional parts keeps the industry running, selling people "the same" stuff over and over. On the other hand, it's the motor behind development of new technology that makes today's top technology become incredibly cheap for the masses tomorrow, so there's no fully negative connotation here.) And don't tell me about "advanced". There are many users that want CERTAINITY and a constantly working environment. They do not "advance" in the way hardware vendors, media industry or governments want them to "advance". > Windows clearly isn't the best server, especially older > versions, but it's popular because desktop Windows is popular. And the follow-up question is: _Why_ is "Windows" that popular? Marketing and product placement strategies. Definitely NOT quality of software. > The > "server" editions of linux distributions are almost mirrors of their > desktops, gui and all. Yes, and I'm old enough to fail to see why I would want to have a GUI on a server that doesn't even have a GPU. :-) Allow me to add a very personal comment: I'm using FreeBSD for many years now, and I have also tried many Linusi for home use, office use, project work and even for some critical stuff. I've always come back to FreeBSD for most uses. This is because I'm primarily a developer. Developers traditionally want GOOD documentation, stable APIs and ABIs, and a system they can trust, which is willing to give them insight to its internals. Secondary, I'm a kind of psychologist who is able to see why _other_ systems are so successful in many fields of IT. With some knowledge it's not hard to conclude where development is heading. Although there are (or have been?) some "big users" of FreeBSD, I would say that this particular system is a niche system. As there are many audiences in IT (to name a few: ISPs, home commodity & entertainment users, gamers, lamers, education, text processing offices, industrial machine control, diagnostics & repair, mobile applications), there _have_ to be many systems, and FreeBSD _fits_ some niches where everything else just FAILS. There is no kind of "one size fits all" operating system. No system is dead that has its users. FreeBSD _has_ and surely _will have_ users who use it, who develop it, who help it carrying on in the future. Poetterings generic statement "isn't relevant anymore" can be proven wrong by _one_ counterexample (as according to logic all allquantified statements can): FreeBSD is not irrelevant _to me_. (And it gets even more strange, as Poettering is allquantifying *BSD!) And furthermore, I've found some Linux users migrating AWAY from Linux, using FreeBSD instead. How can this be combined with Poettering's claim? I've really waited some time to write a statement to a discussion that _I_ consider isnt relevant, as well as Poettering and his creations. Please don't see this as a persomal offence, it's _my_ individual statement as PulseAudio, Avahi and systemd are fully irrelevant to me. He made _his_ personal statement, I made _mine_. :-) -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...