4 ms·

I'm not trying to be argumentative, trollish, etc. But, really none of those are very compelling and a couple are negatives. I can see 3,4,5 being important i

I'm not trying to be argumentative, trollish, etc. But, really none of those are very compelling and a couple are negatives. I can see 3,4,5 being important if I developed software that is directly affected by any of that. 1 is a political argument and one that I stand on other side of the fence on. 2 just sounds like it takes longer for stuff to be released. 3 meh. 4,5 extra meh. Recompiling is so trivial that not having to recompile is a non-feature. 6. I never groked ports I might not hate it if someone explained it to me. OTOH rpm and apt made sense from reading docs. My point is, isn't there anything else? Cause if that's it, I totally understand the respective "market share" FreeBSD and Linux have. btw I've used OpenBSD for public facing firewalls way long ago cause it's security emphasis was a huge feature over Linux.

cperciva 16y ago
But, really none of those are very compelling and a couple are negatives For you, that might be entirely true. We're not fanatics; we have no trouble accepting that for some people FreeBSD isn't the best OS for every task. There are FreeBSD developers who are perfectly happy using Linux, OS X, OpenSolaris, and even Windows on a daily basis.
- njharman 16y ago
  Yes, obviously. But, the point of this thread was to show/"convince" Linux heads what they are missing.
  - cperciva 16y ago
    I wasn't trying to convince anyone of anything. I was just trying to answer the question asked.
palish 16y ago
[Taking more time to develop features correctly] just sounds like it takes longer for stuff to be released This attitude demonstrates a pretty significant lack of experience.
- njharman 16y ago
  The OP stated "This often means that it takes longer before we acquire new features." And the sentence contains the workds "Taking more time" Your reading comprehension needs improvement.
- cookiecaper 16y ago
  I don't know, it's not like Linux just lets things in after a week of testing. I understand the need to do things right, but I also understand the natural tendency in developers toward perfectionism. You have to strike a balance -- in some cases Linux may be closer than BSD or vice-versa, but the real thing is that the open-source philosophy of release early, release often is better embodied by something active like Linux.
  - sgift 16y ago
    Well, not really. While the official releases are quite conservative you can follow CURRENT, which is (as the name suggests) the current development tree. It is all out in the open and if you want something which has not been officially released you can get yourself a copy of the source tree, build yourself a new world ("make world") and you have a current FreeBSD (I cannot speak for the other BSD variants here, but I think the process is similar) with all warts and all the new shiny developments. Oh - and all the bugs.

cperciva 16y ago

But, really none of those are very compelling and a couple are negatives For you, that might be entirely true. We're not fanatics; we have no trouble accepting that for some people FreeBSD isn't the best OS for every task. There are FreeBSD developers who are perfectly happy using Linux, OS X, OpenSolaris, and even Windows on a daily basis.

njharman 16y ago
Yes, obviously. But, the point of this thread was to show/"convince" Linux heads what they are missing.
- cperciva 16y ago
  I wasn't trying to convince anyone of anything. I was just trying to answer the question asked.

palish 16y ago

[Taking more time to develop features correctly] just sounds like it takes longer for stuff to be released This attitude demonstrates a pretty significant lack of experience.

njharman 16y ago
The OP stated "This often means that it takes longer before we acquire new features." And the sentence contains the workds "Taking more time" Your reading comprehension needs improvement.
cookiecaper 16y ago
I don't know, it's not like Linux just lets things in after a week of testing. I understand the need to do things right, but I also understand the natural tendency in developers toward perfectionism. You have to strike a balance -- in some cases Linux may be closer than BSD or vice-versa, but the real thing is that the open-source philosophy of release early, release often is better embodied by something active like Linux.
- sgift 16y ago
  Well, not really. While the official releases are quite conservative you can follow CURRENT, which is (as the name suggests) the current development tree. It is all out in the open and if you want something which has not been officially released you can get yourself a copy of the source tree, build yourself a new world ("make world") and you have a current FreeBSD (I cannot speak for the other BSD variants here, but I think the process is similar) with all warts and all the new shiny developments. Oh - and all the bugs.