I worked in IT for 20+ years too, so you do need to flaunt your experience around. Yeah, well, this is why you have 2 year update cycle, like Ubuntu, Debian or

I worked in IT for 20+ years too, so you do need to flaunt your experience around. Yeah, well, this is why you have 2 year update cycle, like Ubuntu, Debian or you have overlapping support periods like Redhat. You can update you system every once in a while, you know beforehand what will be in the next release and when it will happen. Not some insanity of rolling or semi-rolling packages like BSDs have. Yes, security updates are always a lot less risky than quarterly FreeBSD updates. Quarterly does not receive all sec updates anyway, but do receive some. Worst of both worlds. In fact I think, FreeBSD is not suitable for majority server purposes exactly due to terrible support cycle, despite clear technological advantages (ZFS, Jails etc.). If you limit yourself to some narrow uses, completely serviced by the base system, then yeah you may use it as server, but that is very niche use. FreeBSD actually is a good replacement for Arch-like systems, for workstation uses, exactly due to its semi-rolling nature and separate base systems, this will cause less breakage compared to Arch.