The same holds true for a significant part of Linux newbies...
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I like Linux, but at the same time, don't want every single computer to be using it. Doing so, I believe, is a mistake as it is putting all risk into one OS. Diversifying operating systems would likely prevent your entire network from becoming vulnerable if a serious problem in found within Linux.

The BSDs may also provide another option for things missing from Linux. This could be something removed from Mainline Linux or something not yet brought over.

Half of my machines are now running Kali Linux.

I was offline all of 2020 coping with illness. What I came back to was a change in the FreeBSD community standards unlike anything I have seen in the 17 years I've been a part of it and want no part of now

What I've learned recently was a long time in coming but confirmed to my surprise.
It took extra effort on my part to get rhetoric hot enough to illicit a response to something I've talked about many times.

But make no mistake, there are Chiefs and Indians. What a Chief does without reproach has finally become accepted behavior for Indians.

Here not the place to handle internal affair at that level as a matter of decorum only
These the consequences of their own actions, holding them accountable what I do. With much pain intended to lessen the chance of it happening again the goal.

But threatening me how fights are started and now the opportune time to open old wounds.

Aren't you rather quoting reasons to use Linux instead of *BSD?
That explains why you've been posting so much on LQ lately!

Well, I can only post in some forums here since you called the waaaambulance on me for defending myself against quackerdooms attack on my verbal skills in my own thread and got those posting privileges removed from my account.

I already knew you were watching my content though, not that I was aware I needed to explain anything to you.

Well since I'm "watching" LQ content as a whole, that also includes yours.

Otherwise I have no idea what you're refering to, but you sure are salty about it. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

I like BSD based systems, but then, coming from an Apple background that's no real surprise, as OSX was based heavily on FreeBSD originally.

The best reason for a BSD based system? You could argue that the entire system, from the kernel to the user space has been built as a 'feature complete OS' rather than a Linux based system being a Linux kernel with lots of GNU packages added on top. And lets not mention Linux systemd and related software that many, including myself, see as a tentacled monster insidiously taking over the Linux ecosystem...

If I can live without WiFi then I run OpenBSD on my old MacBook Pro (Broadcom 'SoftMAC' WiFi cards are not supported due to firmware lacking), but given how OpenBSD is set up 'out of the box' it can be quite jarring for a new user, very minimal, but fast and very secure.

DragonflyBSD is novel, using its HAMMER2 file system, and is very usable out of the gate, with a fairly standard desktop environment. It has the same lack of WiFi on my system as OpenBSD however, so again, not very practical for me long term.

FreeBSD does now have the necessary WiFi support for my chip-set however, so I have used FreeBSD and derivatives as daily drivers, and always have a couple of portable versions, such as GhostBSD or NomadBSD on fast USB thumb drives that I carry with me, just in case I need to use a computer, but all that's on offer is one of those Windows systems... shudder..

1 members found this post helpful.

Why OR and not AND?

I boot Fatdog (Linux), admin/files.
Run a Xephyr, pflask (chroot/unshare) with capabilities dropped 'container' ... for general desktop/browser.
Run OpenBSD in a kvm/qemu ... for servers (http, ssh ..etc.).
On a oldish 4GB ram 1TB 2 core laptop, barely 2% of CPU activity.

Base OpenBSD with no packages added and pretty much the default configuration (I do set security level 2 and a few other tweaks) ... works for me. The man alone is a delightful resource to have to hand.
I set iptables in Fatdog that cannot be undone by either the container or OpenBSD, along with pf in OpenBSD that when running with security level 2 can't be changed, so pretty good isolation/separation.

1 members found this post helpful.

I get similar speeds whether I use my laptop wifi or tether my phone (via usb) and use its wifi (or data). Charges the phone at the same time, and if you install/use scpcpy you can also control the phone from the laptop (much easier/quicker for me to type sms's using the laptops keyboard rather than the phones keyboard).

So there's no need for integral laptop wifi support.

The downloading speed of FreeBSD is higher. It can do better file server than linux.
FreeBSD saturates the wifi much better than Linux. It has excellent drivers. Only FreeBSD is like that. FreeBSD has even very good drivers for Ryzen AMD64 graphic cards / GL works very well.

OpenBSD and NetBSD haven't all drivers of FreeBSD.

1 members found this post helpful.

I was doing some reading on this topic the other night. The general consensus seems as follows.

*BSD has a better networking stack. What this means in detail is over my head but it has more fine grained control and more reliability. Better throughput and such.

The kernel has lower latencies. This means for serving files and such it is unmatched. As much of what I read the other day said "Why do you think Netflix uses FreeBSD for their streaming servers". They squeeze out every bit the hardware can do.

On the flipside though Linux is better where any type of gui is concerned. This I didn't understand too well aside from it just has more muscle where it counts for gui stuff.

A consistent statement was along the lines of FreeBSD is more coherent whereby Linux is just the kernel with a bunch of stuff piled on top of it (gnu stuff). BSD is an entire OS.

At the end of the day both are perfectly fine although the *BSD's suffer from lack of drivers and such which is no secret. Both will work better for different things, just like anything else in the world. Proper tool for the job at hand type of thing. I've debated switching to FreeBSD for myself but I can't give up my gaming even as modest as it is, or my wifi. I've no interest in buying new hardware for it either.

One thing I learned that was new to me though... If the *BSD stuff wasn't bogged down in the courts by AT&T back in the day it is a good chance it would be far more dominant than Linux is. That is debatably the main reason it didn't catch like Linux did. Linux may not have even been invented or built if this was the case.

1 members found this post helpful.

FreeBSD has today sufficient number of drivers, a very great number of drivers, really. Even GL games are running fine.

Even Atheros Wifi cards on notebooks work with FreeBSD.

Mayhaps I will take another look then. I'd like to try a pure or at least as close to pure unix as I can. Always heard good about it.

I can't speak for the other BSDs, but NetBSD seems pretty accessible if you want to do OS Dev compared to Linux kernel. It does not seem to have big corporate interest at the helm like Linux so it seems to be directed more by enthusiasts. The downside is development speed is slower so a lot of development seems like trying to catch up support to that which already exists in Linux (drivers).

When I tried FreeBSD I found the eco-system unpleasant. Part of the fun is the circle/forum(s) and one individual in particular was very off-putting over on the freebsd board. A non-mod (the mod(s)) were great) - who seemed to opine he owned the board/forum.

I tend to only use my laptop at home and more as a smart terminal/remote-control type device, vnc'ing into a application server where all of the chrome, libre office, movies ...etc. applications are rendered, leaving the laptop just dealing with the pixel flows, relatively light work and where even just a framebuffer/vesa can suffice, no great need for the latest drivers/graphics. In that context Free/Open/Net BSD's are pretty much equals. Up until 7.1 I was using OpenBSD but I have encountered high cpu/core temperature issues with OBSD 7.1 so have shifted over to NetBSD. cwm default window manager in both cases so once configured looks/feels no different, but where NetBSD 9.2 isn't the leg toaster that OBSD 7.1 has become.

1 members found this post helpful.