Why aren't people using BSD over GNU/Linux? I thought BSD was supposed to be better.
>>51688112
because it came out too late
>>51688112
linux works for me and Ive never been given an obvious reason to switch to a BSD
>>51688112
Ive tried a few times to switch to BSD, its pedigree, the idea of a complete system as a whole and not disjointed systems glued together, the documentation among other things i find really enticing.
It all comes unstuck when i want to do things. I find linux is the equivalent to plug and play these days. You can boot a live cd, install it and be done by the time you take a shit. Fully functional, like windows or osx right then, of course you could patch and add new shit but as a base instlal linux is pretty damn good.
I find BSDs philosphy to an operating system enticinf, but it definitely needs some more polish, pcbsd i thini went too far but they are doing a good job of getting bsd off the ground for desktop use, where the largest userbase is. Ghostbsd is better than freebsd as an install but it needs some more additions.
Honestly feel bsd could compete if they coulf get a few more new people focused on the presentation as the core is great, but its no good having a ferrari engine if the car looks like a fucking dataon 120y
>>51688112
I switched to OpenBSD around a year and a half ago and haven't looked back
It's too broken for desktop use, but the system base is solid
Because OpenBSD is the only operating system besides Windows that even attempts to support IA32 UEFI.
>>51688930
>dissing the datson
because https://youtu.be/qKvHnfSUNEY?t=110
>>51690015
1600s rule
>>51690444
I wish, i got the 1.2 "deluxe" version.
>>51688112
Because what is technically better (or rather, better for some use cases) isn't the be all and end all of why people use what they use. I, for one, see no compelling advantages over Linux for desktop use.
>>51690608
>>51688112
absolutely right my friend. openbsd here, freebsd there, mac everywhere else.
>>51688930
try the freebsd install wizard and select "desktop environment"
>>51688984
shoop
>>51690716
running a client? windows or mac
the only thing that makes mac tolerable is having root on a BSD install
>>51690856
>running a client? windows or mac
Er, what?
>>51688112
It is better. But what desktop user cares about ZFS, jails, dtrace, etc?
Whatever, I'll go ahead and use the OS that meets my needs. Never mind the popularity contest.
>>51690893
i use openbsd every single day even though i'm physically manipulating a macbook most of the time. god forbid someone send me a word document
>>51691396
The statement "running a client? windows or mac" still makes no sense, especially as a response to me not seeing any compelling advantage of BSD over Linux for my use.
>>51688930
OpenBSD is better as a desktop than PCBSD. The problem with PCBSD is that it's essentially FreeBSD + a desktop by default. FreeBSD is just not meant to be a desktop, and the devs will stare at you blankly, mouthing the words "FreeBSD desktop" as if it's an incomprehensible concept. They'll then likely try to convert you to OSX. They've got like one guy who works on their graphics stack, and that's just a part-time, side-interest.
OpenBSD also is meant to be a server OS first and foremost, but the devs actually use it to develop on, so they've devoted a bit of time and resources into adding desktop features. They assume people might want to use it as a desktop and have made X an optional part of the base install. Installing and configuring X is like 95% of why setting up a desktop environment is such a pain. After that it's as simple as: >sudo pkg_add <desktop or wm of choice> >startx<desktop or wm>
The installation of OpenBSD is also about as fucking simple as it can get. That's saying a lot considering that it's a text-based installer. It takes me 15-20 minutes usually. The only thing that may be confusing for someone new is the partition editor. It does leave a lot to be desired, and is a bit unintuitive at first.
Don't get me wrong though. In some ways FreeBSD is a better choice for a desktop. FreeBSD cares more about performance than the OpenBSD people do, and they also care much more about Linux binary compatibility.
Also, I'm not claiming OpenBSD is as easy and hassle-free to get setup as a desktop, as say Mint. You definitely need to do some manual editing and tweaking. I am saying that it's very much a simplified process compared to FreeBSD, or even more so, Gentoo or Arch.
>>51691506
Does OpenBSD support hardware acceleration on a NVIDIA card?
>>51691694
OpenBSD doesn't support Nvidia at all. Use FreeBSD if you have nvidia, the proprietary drivers are directly supported by nvidia
>>51691506
Appreciate the response
>>51691718
AMD? Or perhaps I-I-Intel Integrated?
>>51692558
Both of those should work, Nvidia is the problematic one.
>>51692644
Dag nab it, I have neither of those. Anyways, thanks for the tip.
>>51688112
Tried pcbsd and it didn't work with my laptop. Would openbsd be a better choice
>>51691506
yeah it would certainly take a lot of work to port drivers for my gpu, BSD is trash tier desktop OS for poorfags
