Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 09:13:44 -0500 From: Chris Kiakas <chris@tellme3times.com> To: Dave B <g8kbvdave@googlemail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: freebsd-questions Digest, Vol 804, Issue 5 Message-ID: <7B8F75AB-3B9A-4A55-9567-11FF8E9D877E@tellme3times.com> In-Reply-To: <6a3990c6-9f2e-81b5-c0fe-7315fc831dfb@googlemail.com> References: <mailman.86.1573041604.97553.freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> <6a3990c6-9f2e-81b5-c0fe-7315fc831dfb@googlemail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Nov 6, 2019, at 8:50 AM, Dave B via freebsd-questions = <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> wrote: >=20 >=20 >=20 > Though personally I migrated away from Windows to Linux (I found BSD = too > clunky to use and CPU hungry for desktop use, where it could be > installed. Where as modern Linux's, just load and run with minimal > effort, and are well understood, supported and stable.) That was = after > the great W10 force-feeding saga, where they filled my C drive to the > point that the system would not even boot. DESPITE, their own > compatibility trial saying that my combo' of CPU and GPU were not > compatible with W10!. (AMD and ATI-Rage+) >=20 >=20 > But I have to say, that for most people BSD is not an option for a > desktop "daily driver", except perhaps in the form of an Apple MAC! =20= > But how much time and money did Apple invest in getting it that way? I normally don=E2=80=99t answer emails that pertain to personal choices = but it just annoys me to no end to hear how good all these systems are = then I am hounded to solve issues pertaining to these systems. First and foremost, there is no system out there that doesn=E2=80=99t = require some intervention from a knowledgable person to configure so it = meets the use of the user. I cannot mention how many times people = abandoned hardware for no good reason because they couldn=E2=80=99t find = a driver for it. This same hardware continued to function many years = later without any issue or incidents powered by standards in the BSD or = Linux community. I see people throwing good money away because they = don=E2=80=99t understand simple configuration options in their computing = environment. The simplicity of Windows and Mac have allowed me to live a = very comfortable lifestyle. The fees I charge fixing these easy to use = systems are never produced by FreeBSD replacements. It feels like = FreeBSD fails when the hardware fails. Don=E2=80=99t get me wrong. The proper tool for the proper job. Windows, = Mac, Linux, *BSD and any other OS require knowledge for them to work = efficiently and accordingly to our needs. IoT devices and cell phones = are a prime example of everything that is wrong with this world. If for = any reason you require a service from the device that the manufacturer = does not believe you should have access to even though the device is = capable of, you are blocked from implementing it. They are not easy to = use they are limited in their functionality and designed to be broken on = delivery. This is the direction Windows is going and to some extent Mac. For me computers are a tool to accomplish tasks. I prefer a tool that I = use for the intended purpose rather than something that screams bells = and whistles and yet is not appropriate for it=E2=80=99s purposes. As an = example Windows 10, it=E2=80=99s telemetry. Cell phones and the = restriction imposed on the user such as call recording and app = permissions designed more for marketing purposes rather than the owner. = Mac=E2=80=99s abandonment of 32bit code. Linux, I feel, is headed in the same direction. What you describe as = ease of use I describe as hidden configuration options that when broken = by some force are difficult to put back into place. Most of the time = more difficult than systems that don=E2=80=99t make the claim. Many on = occasion I have had to search for undocumented changes to some obscure = file that isn=E2=80=99t quite performing as =E2=80=9Cnormal=E2=80=9D and = there is no option in the settings to fix such behaviour. I have come to = expect that from Windows and now it=E2=80=99s creeping into Linux = despite the KISS adage, Linux is no longer keeping it simple. I can=E2=80=99= t count the number of times that systemd broke a configuration that was = in place because of some update. I never had that experience for the = KISS text files. At least what I saw in the files was the configuration = that existed in the live environment. It is my experience that with FreeBSD and the Linux versions that = don=E2=80=99t implement systemd a simple configuration file will last = for the lifetime of the system. Systems that hide the configuration = options under supposedly simple interfaces often require intervention = and break just because of the convoluted desire to hide options. If you = don=E2=80=99t believe me look at Windows 10 and Oulook email setup when = the user=E2=80=99s account is not his email address or the convoluted = way that Win10 pushes you to create a Microsoft account. It takes me less time to load and run a FreeBSD system than Windows. God = forbid I need to migrate a Windows system to new hardware. Never a = problem with the *BSD=E2=80=99s or the Linux distributions without = systemd.=20 >=20 > Cheers All. >=20 > Dave B. >=20 >=20 > On 06/11/2019 12:00, freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org wrote: >> "exfat" is certainly a good choice; however, I would not rule out = NTFS >> completely. Windows 7, while not EOL until 2020, is definitely >> comatose. I don't don't know anyone still using it, especially since >> Microsoft offered an easy and free upgrade path. >=20 > --=20 > Created on and sent from a Unix like PC running and using free and = open source software: >=20 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to = "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7B8F75AB-3B9A-4A55-9567-11FF8E9D877E>