Why Are You NOT Using FreeBSD ?

[Mehmet Erol Sanliturk]

On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 4:58 AM, Adam Strohl
<adams-freebsd at ateamsystems.com>wrote:

> On 6/3/2012 17:51, Mehmet Erol Sanliturk wrote:
>
>> Always I am stressing that to manage FreeBSD,  a fair amount of expertise
>> is required which I think this level may be reduced by improving the
>> FreeBSD management by transferring knowledge to its managing parts ( for
>> example : package management , repair of broken parts , installation steps
>> to reach a state like in very easily usable Linux distributions such as
>> Fedora , Mageia , Mandriva , and many others , etc. )
>>
>
> Yeah or a GUI to reduce the need for knowledge transfer.
>
>  You know what to do by your expertise gained over use , which such an
>> expertise is completely missing in a new comer , and even sometimes in
>> very
>> highly experienced computer professionals because a different operating
>> system reduces them to a little experienced new starter .
>>
>>
> I agree and your issue with USB sticks proves my point.  I've never tried
> to mount an NTFS USB stick and I'm OK with that.  But for you it is a big
> hassle (understandably so) and it has definitely negatively impacted your
> view of FreeBSD.
>
>  Compare the cost of a Linux or Windows and personal time , and make a
>> decision which one to choose .
>>
>> Another point frequently mentioned is that FreeBSD is leaned toward
>> servers
>> .
>> Only I want to say that , "Please , install a CentOS , Debian , or Windows
>> Server trial , and see how a server may be ..."
>>
>
> I manage Windows, CentOS and Debian (and RedHat and a few others) servers
> too.   I've found FreeBSD is more reliable on the whole and takes less time
> to maintain (which means less expensive for my clients).  This is one area
> where FreeBSD shines.  And when things do break it is possible to recover
> fairly easily.  That is another.
>
> And yes, in terms of that initial learning curve my experience helps but
> its the OS that is doing the work here.  If I was more experienced with
> Windows or Linux it wouldn't make them any easier to update, either though.
>  So there is a point at which "knowing what to do" stops being the limiting
> issue and its just "ok well this is broken now and it can't be
> cost-effectively fixed".   That crossover point is something that is almost
> never reached with FreeBSD in my experience.
>
> All of this is completely parallel and unrelated to your (or another
> person's) experience as a desktop user though.  What you see is "USB
> thumbdrives don't work" :)   So you decide to use another OS, and probably
> wouldn't advocate for FreeBSD if presented the chance in a server context
> because of that experience.  That is a shame in my book. (I know I'm
> putting words in your mouth but its simply to illustrate my thinking on how
> public perception is formed).
>
>
All of us are here for like and love for FreeBSD and to make it much more
better than the present state .

Our goal is to identify gaps and missing parts to fill the gaps and to
generate missing parts .

Without doing this it is unlikely that FreeBSD will advance by itself . We
should be helpful to developers by bringing issues to agenda .

Actually and really FreeBSD is a very high quality operating system as a
design and an implementation . With its that structure it is an important
contribution to humanity welfare . For this , we really thank very much to
its developers and supporters in any way .

All over the years , my most stressed issue is its "easiness of usability"
, not for my own benefit but for the "normal" users . I can solve my
problems in any way , but the other people are not so much experienced and
they are living without benefiting from FreeBSD .

Since 1970 , I am in this area ( computing ) .

If there were NOT FreeBSD or Linux , we will , MOST LIKELY perhaps still
use  a console mode operating system with painted by a useless windowing
program . If you remember the history , Intel 386 with its 32-bit structure
appeared around 1985 , and a famous operating system , perhaps understood
that there is no other way than doing this , produced its 32-bit , again
painted console mode operating system at 1995 , after 10 years , perhaps
because , their vision was that a 640 Kilo Bytes program would be much more
than requirements of the people .

The contributions made by FreeBSD should NOT be forgotten .


A few days ago I was suggesting to a professor to use a Unix which was very
fond of computer usage too much at the beginning . He asked "Which Unix ?"
. He is just a "user" in a different field than in "Computer Sciences and
Engineering" . Which Unix you can advise to use by him ?

Please think alternatives : ( I am NOT trying to insult any one , please
understand in that way . )

FreeBSD : Installation is now easy . Use : Impossible because of installed
structure  .
PC-BSD : Installation and then use is not possible ( I am trying each one
by one , perhaps one day
               I  can reach to a working release ) .
GhostBSD : Installation is easy . Use is Easy . It is based on only GNOME .
                  Personally I do NOT like GNOME very much and I am NOT
using it .

Linux : ( Fedora , Mandriva , Mageia , and many others ) Wonderful  . I can
not think any other choice other than LInux to suggest to ONLY a user which
he/she will install and use the system .

Please , do NOT forget that server installers and maintainers are computer
professionals having sufficient training to work on such a job .

The point is this .


Thank you very much .

Mehmet Erol Sanliturk