I used to be an Emacs user and felt rather mediocre about it, and then I tried Vim at the recommendation of a colleague and after some discomfort (like maybe an

I used to be an Emacs user and felt rather mediocre about it, and then I tried Vim at the recommendation of a colleague and after some discomfort (like maybe an hour's worth), I was absolutely enamored with Vim in a way I had never been with Emacs. Based on similar reasoning, I've been trying to get into trying BSD lately, as a current and avid user of Linux. I wish that this article would have addressed a bit more about the author's subjective experience of using BSD, as this is currently the sort of thing that would be helpful for me in considering FreeBSD as a desktop OS. The main thing that I have to reconcile currently is the fact that BSD isn't on the bleeding edge like, say, Arch Linux. To give a specific example, until recently, mesa lacked full support for the Sandy Bridge mobile GPUs, and so I couldn't play Minecraft on Linux. Pretty much as soon as a version of mesa with support for Sandy Bridge was released, Arch had it in the repositories where other distros would have lagged weeks behind. Of course, I could alter my lifestyle so that I wasn't always using such new hardware or didn't care so much about being able to play Minecraft without using Windows, but that would require FreeBSD being worth it in some other big way.