4 ms·
Yet… “On FreeBSD you'll notice right away that you're dealing with a "complete operating system", a system that has been put together very well.” It’s a complet
by gabereiser 4y ago
Yet… “On FreeBSD you'll notice right away that you're dealing with a "complete operating system", a system that has been put together very well.” It’s a complete operating system. /s
This is why FreeBSD loses in my view. The arrogance of claiming to be a complete system when basic stuff like wifi doesn’t work.
- teakettle42 4y ago> basic stuff like wifi Wi-fi is not basic. Having written a wifi driver, that’s something I’m comfortable stating unequivocally. The hardware is almost always proprietary and undocumented, and in many cases (looking at you, Broadcom), a poorly-designed shitshow of complex errata, proprietary magic numbers required for initialization, and in general, an absolute dogshit technology stack. The only reason Linux has working Wi-Fi at all tends to be because it was used to power a lot of cheap consumer access points, and Wi-Fi chipset manufacturers released binary and open-source Linux drivers — generally of horrific quality, but drivers nonetheless.
- bregma 4y agoNo true Scotsman OS needs WiFi so it's not a basic requirement of a complete OS.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- School-Cotton 4y agoIt’s a complete operating system on supported hardware, of course. Even Linux doesn’t work on all random laptop hardware.
- chungy 4y agoThe arrogance of claiming that "wifi doesn't work", implying for everyone, when it's really just _your_ hardware that it doesn't work on. For me, FreeBSD wifi works straight of the box on the laptop I have.
- Klonoar 4y agoNo, it "works" in that it's 2.4ghz. That is not what most people would expect from speed at this point. It will "work" correctly when it supports general consumer expectations e.g 5ghz networks, which has been a common complaint about FreeBSD for years now.