Local Trash Enthusiast
kiwifarms.net
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2022
Literally just use Pinta. It is nearly 1:1 to Paint.Net
The Linux Thread - The Autist's OS of Choice
- Thread starter tehpope
- Start date
-
Want to keep track of this thread?
Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
Create account
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
Already mentioned my thoughts on it here.
- Joined
- May 12, 2017
Because the Plasma team is inexplicably getting mogged on the PROGRESS(tm) to full Wayland by GNOME and they can’t let that slight stand.
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2020
Fully on Mint now. I am absolutely digging it so far. It literally just werks.
GTK apps play horribly with Windows in terms of UI, I tried using some GNU finance related program recently and it looked so jarring I just didn't bother with it, no idea why they're like thatAlso, I have no idea what footfags did but all of this modern GTK shit looks like this on Windows.
It has this gigantic black border extending far beyond the windows' actual border. Same thing happens with Gajim.
- Joined
- May 12, 2017
I’ve had my Linux Mint box running smooth and steady since September 2024 when I took the plunge back into daily driving Linux. Even before then, Mint was (and still honestly is) an excellent fallback I jumped to if I ever went too far with distro hopping and needed something sane again. It ain’t sexy, it ain’t bleeding edge, it’s kinda boring once you have your shit set up, but Mint honestly does deserve the title of “Ol’ Reliable.”
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2024
gentoo really does have some great tools. gentoolkit is full of useful utilities. eix is such an overpowered package search tool, I think most people never even learn how to fully use it. portage lets you do an insane amount of customization through the /etc/portage directory. You don't need to do it, but if you have something you want to do while installing/building your packages you can definitely do it. There is the eselect tool that lets you set up quite a bit, change environment variables, compiler versions, even set up services, though that is technically depricated (unfortunately). you have the etc-update and dispatch-conf that let you handle file conflicts in a way I think is probably better than any of the other distros I've used. the package manager tells you there is something you need to handle, then you can choose either of those tools to take care of it. Then you have the /etc/config-archive that keeps the copies of the old versions of the files in case you made a mistake (you can also use etckeeper to do git versioning on your etc directory if you want, which is mention in the gentoo wiki). Then you have tools like genlop that are built around viewing build logs and times. I mean, I can go on and on about all the tools you get with gentoo. Event he default ones that a lot of people don't know about, the ones that start with q like quse are pretty good.
I think among the linux distros it probably does have some of the most powerful package management tooling. It's not quite as powerful as nix, but nix has the tradeoff of its wierd immutable filesystem, and a lot of edge-cases, and other things that come with it's way of doing things. Like being forced to write your own packages to just manually build something that isn't already in the repo. Gentoo, for the most part just works like any normal linux distro, while giving you all the things it does.
I would hardly say it was a rug pull. If you are talking about the move to wayland. It's something they've been talking about doing for a while. It was pretty clear for anyone paying attention they were planning to drop x11 support as soon as they got through the remaining blockers they had.
Either way, use cinammon.
I don't think that's entirely accurate. The key word I'm talking about is the word constant. I think the developement around wayland heavily picked up around the time distros started seriously considering it as a display server. Before that it was more like a play-thing for the people that were developing it. Then when the gnome people, the kde people, and the others decided this has potential, and they wanted to use it. They had to start contending with actual use cases, and problems they didn't think about when they origionally started with the project.
To give wayland some credit, it's design isn't all bad. Just like anything, it's a tradeoff. Combining the compositor with the window manager and the display server does actually allow them to be more efficient. Instead of having to communicate through different parts of the system and back. So that is a positive. The negative is what you said. That means the compositor is the one responsible for taking care of all of this stuff. And with it basically just being a set of protocols that they compositor may or may not choose to support, you end up with different compositors supporting different things. Also you have compositors potentially duplicating work.
At least attempting to look at waylands current state objectively, and where it will probably end up. I think the last year is when it finally became widely usable for people. And the last few years are really where the work on making into something a desktop user can be fine with started happening. Now that it's gaining wide adoption, I do expect some things to actually see improvements a lot more rapidly than they did 10 or 15 years ago, when nobody gave a fuck about it. I also expect to see some level of standardization, maybe not between gnome and kde, because the gnome peole are faggots that always have to be special, and pretend they are doing somehting because their way is the "best". I don't think the standardization will be on purpose necessarily. You will just see compositors, and projects built around wayland support the things the most people use naturally, and the standard way of doing things will be built around that. So I don't really mean a formal standard. And I think you will also see more developement around things like wlroots or a smitthy way of making compositors. Where you don't have to worry about reinventing the wheel when you make a compositor. But we will see how that developes over time.
My experience as the complete opposite. At least gentoo is slightly more technical up front. But once you are done with the install, and you get how portage works, its basically like running anything else. Event he install is pretty much the same as any other distro, the only differences are you have to set up portage for your system. But otherwise it's the same idea. get the filesystem ready, install the stuff on it (in this case through extracting an archive), do a bit of configuration like setting up mirrors, installing the stuff you need like the kernel, and a boot loader, setting up a user account, and the groups you need. Then once you are going, it's basically like running arch, with a slower moving repository, and a powerful source based package manager that handles build flags, and the dependency changes that come with adjuting those. and a ton of different system configurations and cpu architectures.
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2019
Those of us who have used Linux for a few years now will understand the following rant, taken from the GitHub page for SUSE systems developer Stefan Hundhammer's 'QDirStat'. After the disappointment that was KDE4, Hundhammer reworked KDirStat- which he originally developed for KDE 1 within a year of that first version being released, and had ported through the Qt/KDE major versions through to the pinnacle of GUI design, KDE 3, to use only standard Qt libraries and build tools. That original KDirStat inspired WinDirStat and the interface of basically every single GUI file utilization visualization design for the past two decades. The man is a hero. The only feature QDirStat drops from KDirStat is not being able to use KIO to, for example, analyze the disk usage on a remote SFTP or WEBDAV target. Which would be relevant if KDE 4 hadn't shat the bed on everything KIO related, which it did.
His story replicates my own experience after KDE 3- although unlike Mr. Hundhammer, I have never created a utility application that redefined what was required to get a job done:
His story replicates my own experience after KDE 3- although unlike Mr. Hundhammer, I have never created a utility application that redefined what was required to get a job done:
In the following GitHub issue, Mr. Hundhammer encounters a randomly created AppImage of the application he built with the specific intention that you could install it when you're running out of space to figure out where all the space has gone. The AppImage is- before it expands itself on your /tmp/ drive- 50x times the size it should be. Also, it does not run on LTS versions of Ubuntu that will be supported until 2028 because it uses unnecessarily restrictive versions of glibc. He is Unimpressed.
- Joined
- Dec 10, 2023
I just want to say I really genuinely resent having to learn Linux because Microsoft got jeeted. It is clunky, ungainly, and takes twenty steps to do things that I could do in two with Windows back in the day.
For example, on Windows there was a program called f.lux. You could install it, and then at night your screen would dim a bit and show less blue light. It had a nice little GUI with sliders and boxes for you to tell it your location so it'd know when and how much to dim, based on the time of day and your latitude.
On Linux, the best option is a program called redshift. All the documentation is in Danish, there's like four versions called redshift, redshiftqt, redshiftgtk, and qredshift, and you have to manually create a configuration file and write code to set it how you want it.
I feel like I went from driving a 2020 Toyota Corolla to driving a 1960 Volkswagen Beetle with a finicky engine swap. I can do whatever I want to it but it takes constant screwing around with in order to get it to do things that used to just trivially work.
For example, on Windows there was a program called f.lux. You could install it, and then at night your screen would dim a bit and show less blue light. It had a nice little GUI with sliders and boxes for you to tell it your location so it'd know when and how much to dim, based on the time of day and your latitude.
On Linux, the best option is a program called redshift. All the documentation is in Danish, there's like four versions called redshift, redshiftqt, redshiftgtk, and qredshift, and you have to manually create a configuration file and write code to set it how you want it.
I feel like I went from driving a 2020 Toyota Corolla to driving a 1960 Volkswagen Beetle with a finicky engine swap. I can do whatever I want to it but it takes constant screwing around with in order to get it to do things that used to just trivially work.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 12, 2017
Gentoo is something I've always attempted intermittently, but I could never get off the ground. Pure skill issue. See, I'm actually autistic enough to run
make menuconfig and start configuring my kernel going off stuff I just rote memorised... but always forgetting a kernel module, USB, SATA, or something along those lines. Reboot after installing GRUB and my shit just hangs. I've seen Gentoo install guides where they just install a binary kernel and there's somthing that just feels... wrong about that? Compiling from source is a pain in the ass, it takes a long time, you run the risk of forgetting compile time options, but that's the whole point of running Gentoo or compiling from any BSD ports tree. Gentoo is an entirely self-inflicted skill issue for me, and I refuse to take the easy way out by using a binary kernel or compiling a generic one just so I can avoid learning how to make a truly custom one. I went through the trouble of picking a source distro, and I'll be damned if I don't sit down and compile Firefox. I better goddamn need that software if I'm gonna install it by source, even with Portage and its myriad features I never learned in depth because I never got a working Gentoo system at all thus far.Cheers for the correction. That said, I'm nowhere near optimistic about Wayland's future. Yes, it's definitely far more useful between 2024-2025 than it was between 2014-2015. No, it's nowhere near ready for prime time and it ultimately never will be. Wayland's biggest stumbling blocks are twofold:
a) Fundamental implementation issues that are a byproduct of how Wayland the protocol is specified, and how compositors need to make up the difference from there. X is a bloated behemoth in terms of disk space, but even full fat X11 basically uses like 1GB of memory tops while keeping all the graphical primitives and libraries on standby. Wayland's design means that there will always be more RAM and GPU usage because everything must be redrawn and sandboxed the moment you click the button to make another window appear. If you move shit across your monitor or between monitors, shit gets redrawn. Absent a full Wayland 2.0 specification rewrite where the compositor gets standardised too, Wayland cannot get over this hurdle.
b) The biggest representatives of Wayland are also its worst. GNOME and KDE already receive heaps of corporate assistance and paid developer hours working on these projects. It's why GNOME and KDE even have COCs in the first place. Not just from Red Hat but also Canonical, SUSE, etc. Freedesktop was already compromised by Red Hat, but GNOME decided to throw salt in the wound by coming up with their own "Human Interface Guidelines." The jump from Plasma 5 to Plasma 6 was a disaster for KDE where the Wayland push was hideously botched, tons of regressions emerged in the X11 session, and now they're nixing X11 altogether because they don't wanna maintain it. GNOME and KDE both have heaps of open bug reports for persistent issues on Wayland despite corporate assistance. I know it's a running joke about enshittification, but this is the current standard of quality we have with paid developer time. GNOME and KDE leadership need to be fundamentally overhauled in a hostile takeover situation where all the obstinate bullshit gets thrown out and actual QA and maintenance returns.
I ain't ever gonna talk shit about your experiences with FreeBSD because ultimately, it's a hardware thing and I've certainly had those problems before. Desktop PC tower with all AMD hardware currently running FreeBSD 14.3 with a striped ZFS pool using the entire portable hard drive I install shit to. It'll run anything from Windows 11 to friggin Haiku. I think yours was on a laptop (correct me; sounds like it because you mentioned wpa_supplicant, maybe you explained earlier and I didn't read properly), and unless you're running a Thnkpad TXXX laptop, it's a real crapshoot. Having said that... I really do think you're being unfair to FreeBSD. It's more than capable of being a desktop system; many FreeBSD developers and contributors themselves daily drive FreeBSD as their desktop OS.
You're over here waxing poetic about powerful features and the thrill of learning them, but you're doing so in a Gentoo context. Meanwhile, you're overlooking how FreeBSD's ports tree was the literal inspiration for Portage in the first place... that's why it's called Portage. FreeBSD has an assload of cool ass shit that it can do as a desktop, a workstation, a server, or anything else you can come up with. The trick is, like with Gentoo and even Arch, you gotta actually learn it on its own terms. "It" being FreeBSD, of course.
**
This is a cliché talking point, everyone says it when they learn about FreeBSD for the first time, but the "base system" vs. "ports" (i.e. external applications) distinction is critical. If you don't "really" get it, you're gonna have a bad time.
Gentoo, Arch, Debian's minimal netinstall ISO, they all have a "base" of sorts, but it's not the same thing as FreeBSD's base system. When you boot into a text console on Gentoo, Arch, or Debian, you're booting into a hodgepodge of software that's effectively "off the shelf." The Linux kernel is developed separately from GNU coreutils which is developed separately from glibc which is developed separately from groff which is developed separately from bash which is developed separately from yadda yadda yadda. All Linux distributions fail to make a distinction between "core system" and "external applications" because the entire distribution is nothing but external applications.
FreeBSD is a complete text-based OS. That text console you boot into for the first time when running FreeBSD has an entire set of Unix tools that are built to work together and play nice as a singular, unified whole. That's why you can't ever find a "BSD From Scratch" book, let alone isolate any given BSD's libc and package it as separate software. For the stuff they don't develop independently like GCC or GNU Readline, they still integrate it into the base system but it's a highly customised variant that cannot be packaged separately. The base system is responsible low-level hardware interactions, it has all the systems and subsystems necessary for external applications to utilise, but it doesn't ship with anything else beyond that.
**
If someone says "FreeBSD doesn't support my graphics card," that's a technically correct statement built on a false premise because FreeBSD (i.e. the base system) doesn't even ship with graphical support. Graphics drivers and display servers, available in the Ports tree, are what make your graphics card work. Graphics drivers exist in the ports tree, so you'd need to install
drm-kmod or nvidia-driver. then add something like amdgpu_enable="YES" or nvidia_enable="YES" to /etc/rc.conf. Even then, all the goodies for a proper graphical environment are outsourced to the display server like X or Wayland. Installing either pulls in all the other crap necessary for graphics to function like Mesa.Fun fact: NetBSD and OpenBSD both have X in their base systems because their design goals necessitate a full graphical stack available out of the box, altered permissions, dedicated user for X, etc. Therefore, you can make declarative statements on whether or not either OS supports your graphics card.
The whole point of this diatribe was basically to point out that everything that you install via
pkg install whatever or cd /usr/ports/category/program && make install clean, be it something comparatively simple like a headless LAMP stack or something relatively complex like a graphical environment with XFCE4, Firefox, VLC, and LibreOffice and all their required dependencies, are considered external applications. The FreeBSD FAQ used to say it outright.FreeBSD FAQ from 2021 said:
The TLDR is basically:
1) We just give you the text console. The text console's got the tools for you to install stuff, we got an assload of shit in the Ports tree, tons of stuff there can do most of what you need it to do, but again: all you get from us is the terminal. If the handbook doesn't cover it as a courtesy, you're on your own.
2) If you have a critical need for X/Y/Z software, it ain't designed for FreeBSD in the slightest, and there ain't any option for it in the Ports tree, you're outta luck unless you wanna take a crack at porting it. Sorry, that's just how it works.
**
To be 100% clear here: I'm not talking shit about the Ports maintainers, let alone the FreeBSD developers themselves. It just so happens that it behooves the FreeBSD team to maintain a critical distinction between the operating system itself vs. the ports collection. Speaking of Ports, let's actually get into what they really are.
Traditionally, UNIX users compiled software from source code. If you have something on a PDP-11 and you need to make it run on a VAX or an Alpha, you'd modify the source code to make sure it compiles and installs correctly. In other words, you port it over, hence the name "Ports." With time, the BSD family of Unices developed an entire tree of makefiles that would eventually metamorphose into the various ports collections across Free/Net/OpenBSD. The Ports collection on FreeBSD, to this day, is basically a giant collection of makefiles sorted by category. Binary packages are built directly from the Ports tree. The maintainers of the various ports in FreeBSD's collection do a ton of work to make sure shit buidls cleanly across i386, amd64, arm64, powerpc, and so on.
System V Unices like Solaris, AIX, HP-UX and Unix clones based on System V like MINIX, GNU/Linux, and non-GNU Linux distributions never had any concept of a ports collection in the first place. That's why Debian, Fedora, Arch, OpenIndiana, even stuff like Android and Alpine have wildly different package counts across their repositories. There are definite differences in package counts between FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD, but the differences in absolute number of packages isn't so stark as say... the difference between Debian's official repositories vs. Arch's official repositories.
**
All of this rambling, and I haven't even remotely scratched the surface of all the cool shit that FreeBSD has going for it. bhyve is super interesting stuff, it kinda reminds me of QEMU in a lot of ways. Linux has cgroups and Docker/Podman, those are definitely far more robust than FreeBSD's jails, but FreeBSD jails are still plenty adequate for similar use cases you'd fire up Docker/Podman for. FreeBSD users can even share jail setups via templates and third-party images (BastilleBSD is Docker-adjacent, IIRC). Also helps to remember that FreeBSD jails are significantly older than cgroups/Podman/Docker and designed to be much simpler. Docker/Podman's complexity means more attack surface. That's something else to think about, but I need to wrap this up.
Are there things that Linux does better than FreeBSD by leaps and bounds? Yes. Are there things that FreeBSD does better than Linux by leaps and bounds? Also yes. I daily drive Linux Mint and I just install shit onto a portable drive whenever I feel the ruge to break stuff. Daily driving FreeBSD's more than possible, I have a rudimentary graphical environment up and running on my portable drive, but I don't currently have the stones to do all that stuff to make Steam work, polish up XFCE4, etc. I'm actually with you on the same page when you and I both don't currently daily drive FreeBSD.
I just take exception to your vitriol against FreeBSD when you leave the bounds of hardware and start talking about how "FreeBSD sucks because I must do X/Y/Z to get A/B/C running, also lemme talk about how great Portage is, USE flags, and all the other stuff most people don't bother to learn about Gentoo."
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
Sounds exactly like Windows to me. It's not revolutionary, it's boring, but once you set it up at least it fucking works, gets out of your way and you get to do your work in peace. Dunno why this mindset is so controversial when it comes to Linux and you have to use some meme distro like Arch or one of those meme immutable gaming distros and willingly inflict cock and ball torture upon yourself when you could just do what everyone did for years and install Mint. My uncle who's been a computer nerd since the 80's with a Commodore 64 that I eventually inherited is running Mint today. His daughter is using it to browse the Internet and I've set up pirated Minecraft for her on it.
Stop distro hopping and install Mint. Don't be a faggot.
Fun fact: Windows had a built-in blue light filter since 10. Not nearly as robust as f.lux, but still, even Microsoft went ahead and implemented it themselves. Meanwhile I don't think a single Linux DE implemented something similar. KDE or GNOME would be the main contenders for it.
You do bring up a very valid point: if you're deep in the Windows software ecosystem, the last thing you want to do is migrate to Linux, because you'll quickly realize that for all the yearly shilling, Linux still lacks a ton of good alternatives for the software you use under Windows, and you'll do everything in your power to stay on Windows just because the alternatives are so much worse. For you personally that is. Of course, if you are to look for alternatives or even worse, ask Linux users for them, you'll hear the exact same excuses. "Oh you don't actually need that", "oh you can do this by doing XYZ you don't need a dedicated program", or "oh there's this alternative just use this it's just as good if not better because it's FOSS" even though it's either completely busted jank or is missing a bunch of features.
Just try asking for a ShareX alternative and see how quickly you'll get recommended some Greenshot tier barebones screen capture software because Linux users couldn't give less of a shit about your use cases for using a given piece of software, as long as the alternative roughly matches the description of what you're using, that's good enough, use that and switch to Linux already, bump up the OS market share. They only care to try and persuade you to switching to Linux, that's all they care about, and your personal day-to-day experience with your computer doesn't matter. If it gets significantly worse, it doesn't matter, because you're using Linux. This hasn't changed for decades and given how Linux users never ever get the memo despite being told exactly how it looks like from a Windows power user standpoint, they'll never learn.
Hell, Linux users love to scoff at the idea of a "Windows power user", as if you're cursed to use Windows exactly the way Microsoft wants you to. No, I didn't pull that out of my ass, that's one of my many genuine experiences with Linux community's arrogance and at this point I refuse to believe in the whole "it's just a loud minority" excuse since rarely, if ever do I see that "silent majority" that's actually sane. In my experience, those tend to be pragmatic realists and tell you straight faced that while server Linux is amazing, desktop Linux is a miserable pile of horseshit and they still use Windows on their desktops, or switched to Mac. But then they're not really Linux users if they don't do mental gymnastics to make it seem like desktop Linux is totally viable as a Windows alternative.
- Joined
- May 12, 2017
I agree with most of what you said, but I take specific exception to the above! I already installed Mint last year, I still keep it maintained and live out of it for real-world shit, and I'm still an autistic faggot.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2022
KDE's built-in Night Light feature isn't good enough? I just checked, it lets you set custom times to adjust the screen temperature, or it can just go by timezone, and it has options to set day and night temperatures to whatever you prefer (default 6500K and 4500K respectively).
You clearly have been using a different Windows than me. Mine nags me constantly about the most inane things, is full of ads, and reboots every five minutes to install updates. Then when I finally click shut down, it has more updates to install, after which it will reboot to the login screen rather than actually shut off. And on the off chance it does actually shut off, your next boot is going to take half an hour extra because all those updates you were supposed to get when you clicked Shut Down and Update didn't actually install.
Meanwhile on Linux updates can be set to run automatically in the background, and they just apply automatically, it doesn't interrupt your work and if you do need to keep the computer on overnight to let it run whatever, you can rest assured it'll still be on when you return in the morning because there's no such thing as automatic reboots.
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2024
I just installed NixOS. I'm not gonna troon out right? I don't have the legs for programming socks...
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2024
You can still be saved by installing Guix or rather partially as there are still troons there
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2024
Being a FLOSS/Stallman troon sounds even worse.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
In the same sense you can live out of Windows and distro hop Linux for fun. The point still stands, Mint is the most stable, just works option there is if you don't want Windows and don't let other midwits fool you into believing you need Arch or some other bleeding edge meme distro.
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2018
- Joined
- Apr 1, 2024
The tip I have is install the binary kernel when installing. Not because you just get it out of the way and move on. Install it, then install modprobed-db. set up modprobed-db. Finish installing the system. Then reboot, use it for a bit, plug in a usb stick, do various tasks you know you will be using your kernel for, set up a vm if you plan to use those, set up a firewall, a vpn. All the things that will have some kernel interface. and either have a cron job that runs modprobed-db once in a while, or manually run it.
then you take the database that made, and you use make localmodconfig but pointing towards the file the modules you use are stored in. then at that point, you can run make menuconfig to make manual changes while know you already have all the modules you actually need enabled, and all the ones you don't disabled. So you will only need to confirm things are how you want them, or make changes to the other parts of the kernel. And unless you fuck around with things you really shouldn't you are pretty much guaranteed to have a running kernel made for your system at the end.
That's why you want to install the binary kernel while installing gentoo.
At least on the wayland compositors I use that's not true. But I don't use a de. For me on a fresh boot the ram usage is identical to a fresh boot and launching dwm with xorg. generally about 600-700mb for both. If I want to use a compositor with dwm, it will have another 100mb. But that could be true for full desktops or other wayland compositors I've never tried before.
This actually is true. I already wouldn't have used them. But from what I've seen those are much worse than anything I would use by choice. I have installed them and messed around with short periods, and I can see why some people think wayland is bad, if that's their only experienc with it.
I know, and as someone that came from gentoo the freebsd ports were actually really disapointing to me. Because they just felt like what I get on gentoo, without all of the nice things I get with gentoo. There are some tools that let you do some automation with it, but they really didn't seem geared towards the type of use gentoo's portage is. Like you have poudriere that automates things, but you don't really get the fine grained control that I'm used to with portage, and it feels like it's built a different use case. I just found myself wishing I was on gentoo, using portage while I was building ports. Especially when I had to build something with a ton of dependencies, or a lot of use flags, that I didn't think was going to be that involved for whatever reason. Because instead of just running
equery u package-name I was stuck answering 100 prompts for what build flags to use. Asking myself if I should just cancel the build.There are ways around that, but my point is. I just felt like portage, but missing all the things I like about portage.
There is slackware. Noone uses it, but that's sort of the idea with it. You get an entire repository of things with the base install, they go into their own part of the system. Then everything isn't part of that. But for slackware, you are truly on your own with everything outside of the base system, which does at least come with a lot, including a multiple choices for a gui (from what I remember). And with the default package management tools, it doesn't even worry about dependencies. There are third party package managers that do take care of that, but still.
Anyway, my problem with freebsd isn't actually the hardware support. On one computer freebsd runs fine, the other it actually is fucked, but I don't hold that against it. What I hold against freebsd, and I try to make this clear, is that it calls itself a general operating system that's built to be a server, desktop, or run on embedded platforms. And it just isnt' All the nice things about freebsd are almost useless for a desktop user. Its very obvious the server (and maybe embedded) are the only things they give a fuck about. There are a ton of great things about freebsd, but almost all of the are completely irrelivant if you are running it on a desktop. Their virtualization stuff, the containerization tools, the tools they provide around networking (and if you use wifi networking is one of the biggest pain points with freebsd on the desktop), the tools they have built around MAC, and other security features. They are all great and really powerful, but they don't make it better as a desktop OS, they make it a great choice to run on a server.
So again, my problem with freebsd is as a desktop operating system. It's just worse than almost any linux distro. for that use case. It certainly is neglected by them.
I think windows is more bleeding edge than things like debian, or debian based distros. I know you are more likely to get a random breakage, or a blue screen of death after an update running windows than you are on a debian-based system you have set up.
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2019
Could you please stop talking about Windows if you haven't used it in the past two decades or so? Thank you.