> Edit : the summary of quality of drivers is right in the last paragraph in the article. yeah, honestly the problem with linux is the unstable kernel ABI, whi

> Edit : the summary of quality of drivers is right in the last paragraph in the article. yeah, honestly the problem with linux is the unstable kernel ABI, which BSD does not suffer from. And BSD also doesn't have the copyleft "can't link to anything not GPL'd" problem either. it's not that NVIDIA's linux teams aren't good, actually they do a pretty good job with the linux driver, has a working GPGPU userland, etc (although the UI makes the windows one look futuristic, and there's been some spats around wayland etc). it's that the linux kernel doesn't care about ABI because of aggressive in-tree'ing of compatible modules, and proprietary binary modules will never be compatible with GPL unless there's some kind of a shim (like they've added). which does not apply to freebsd. as I said, freebsd is astonishingly boring with how competently engineered and well-documented and stable the whole thing is, and it's a shame that docker/k8s is where the momentum is going. Jails are a great option (and docker is only just now starting to tackle some of the security theoretically open up a lot of support for linux applications/etc. it's just something that most orgs (rightly) won't devote even a minute to looking into, because it's not where the momentum is going. not talking about backend services/etc here, but, if I had to design a long-life appliance where it needs to run for a long time with minimal supervision and oversight, and have minimal support costs, freebsd+zfs open up some neat options. FreeBSD is stable and long-life, so you're not going to find some critical system component churned out from under you by poettering or someone like that. And ZFS lets you deploy system updates as images/snapshots and do rollbacks to a known-safe version if something goes wrong or it fails to boot etc.