I am curious if there's anything that you can't use BSD for.
I'll start. I use OpenBSD as a desktop for: e-mail, web browsing, ftp, web design, IRC, banking, youtube, and typing documents. I can't use OpenBSD for Netflix.
How do you deploy your BSD box? Do you run desktops, servers, or other appliances?

Edit: Added later.
The original thread title was "What do you use BSD for?" After reading some comments in the thread I decided to change the thread title to "Is there anything you can't use BSD for?"
Please feel free to list, discuss if there is any task that you are unable to do using BSD. I'd also like to know what you use your BSD box for. I'm hoping to get a wide variety of comments from desktop users, hobbyists, and BSD system administrators.

As a teaching box for now. I am sure learning how to reinstall GhostBSD every-time I try something adventurous but wrongly applied since burning my first disk. I do not use it as a main box presently. I am lucky enough to do things like that.

1 members found this post helpful.

I single boot OpenBSD on a desktop I use as a home computer. So I use it for all normal purposes. Not for things like banking of course, which I never do over the internet.

1 members found this post helpful.

I'm running FreeBSD and PCBSD in VMs primarily for learning, but I've been using then, particularly FreeBSD, heavily for various desktop tasks, including visiting LQ here. I allocated the VMs lots of space so I could play freely in them.

I must say, the quality and thoroughness of the FreeBSD documentation is striking.

2 members found this post helpful.

I do not want this to appear insulting. It is simply an observation of appearances. The question in the OP has the appearance of being asked by a Linux user who is dabbling in BSD. It is like the questions posted on this board by Windows users who occasionally boot their dual-boot Linux systems asking if anyone here only uses Linux. The answers will be much different here than if the question were posted on a BSD forum.

Well, because of this thread. It sparked interest in me to give dragonfly a try. sometime later on this weekend.

mainly

So far. I seem to like their documentation (dragonfly) better than what I am using. You know. The one that froze hell.

1 members found this post helpful.

I run FreeBSD on a multi-boot machine with Slackware and Slackware64.

I installed it in order to learn a BSD to a good level of proficiency through actual use, instead of play.

I have felt right at home with FreeBSD from the start, with just a little extra attention required to make ports management as second nature as SBo package management under Slackware.

My actual uses of it so far has been as a database server (MySQL and PostgreSQL) for selected projects, and as primary development platform for a couple of in house C/C++ projects. But when booted for those uses it also becomes my desktop for the day with Fluxbox, Firefox, Thunderbird, TaskWarrior, etc... all synched to my Slackware machines. Not many bumps moving between them so far!

For most of my other C/C++ projects I now build them incrementally on the FreeBSD machine as well just to be sure I don't write anything that would be a problem. This is the extent of my cross-platform awareness, but very useful so far.

I second that! It is the standard for others to aspire to!

1 members found this post helpful.

GhostBSD froze? If so, use the FreeBSD Handbook. Ghost and PCBSDs are FreeBSD pre-configured with a GUI and accompanying applications. Most of the information in the FreeBSD Handbook will be applicable to them also.

1 members found this post helpful.

This is true enough. But this is a Linux site and there are only a handful of *BSD users frequenting this forum anyway - you and I are probably the most active. The rest are Linux users who use a *BSD as a hobby thing to play with as you say, but use Linux for day to day use.

I agree. For those that use BSD intensively / professionally a question like "what do you not use BSD for?" could have been more interesting...

I asked the question to spark conversation, not to draw insults. I've used FreeBSD since 5.x. At your convenience I would appreciate it if a moderator would please close this thread.

You've certainly sparked conversation - not sure why one post where no insult was intended has caused such a reaction? And how long someone has used FreeBSD isn't really relevant. I've come across people who have used their OS of choice for 10+ years and are still clueless about it and others who have pretty much mastered the basics in less than a month. I'm ok with the idea that there are kids who could learn stuff about OpenBSD in less than a week, which might take me 6 months -> never.

Randicus made a valid point in fact that there are Linux users who use a *BSD as a hobby or side project, but it never replaces Linux as their main OS. And it's correct to say that there are windows users who treat Linux in the same way.

1 members found this post helpful.

Point well taken. I'm likely reading too much into the comments. It is hard sometimes to determine the intent of a poster.
unSpawn, and other moderators please disregard my request for thread closure. Let us carry on.

We have to remember the following:

1. *BSD operating systems are a base system only. The rest (e.g. ports/packages) is not the OS.

2. The ports system consists of software ported to that particular *BSD. Ports can be a combination of POSIX compliant type code - i.e. the stuff that 'should just build and run' - and other code - i.e. stuff which is coded with Linux in mind, which requires actual 'porting'. But that's an oversimplification.

3. *BSDs are really targeted at servers and other devices. The code is there for people to use - anyone - none of the four main BSD derived projects are focused on putting together fancy desktop systems for x86 users.

4. The *BSDs have nothing like the level of hardware vendor support and contribution that the Linux kernel has.

5. *BSDs have nowhere near the amount of closed source software developed for them compared with Linux.

With this in mind there are going to be a lot of things you can't do, which you will need another OS for. Some of us get by or find alternatives, some don't.

So yes, it's more interesting in a way to know what people can't do as opposed to what they actually do use it for.

2 members found this post helpful.

Good points, cynwulf. I've changed the thread title and my initial post to reflect the new topic.