> The BSDs and the illumos distributions generally follow an approach to design and development that aligns more closely with the way I think My impression has

> The BSDs and the illumos distributions generally follow an approach to design and development that aligns more closely with the way I think My impression has been that Linux is simply better than the BSDs. Now, BSD users may disagree; my point is primarily that Linux is more flexible overall. Take LFS/BLFS - you basically have extensive documention how to adjust Linux. Where is that available for BSD on an equal basis? And that is just one example of many more. I remember in the past how NetBSD on the mailing list acknowledged that Linux runs on more computers, including the very important toasters, than NetBSD. Momentum means a lot. Top 500 supercomputers run Linux too: https://www.top500.org/statistics/details/osfam/1/ https://www.top500.org/statistics/details/osfam/1/ These may all be small reasons but they add up eventually. > To give an example, I am not against systemd on principle And it is possible to use Linux without systemd too. Nobody wants a corporate-controlled project in Linux anyway. Where does Poettering work? ;) > Therefore, in certain cases, the GPL becomes a double-edged sword: on one hand, it protects the software and ensures that contributions remain available. On the other, it risks creating a situation where the most "influential" player can totally direct development But that is possible in the MIT/BSD world too. See Shopify controlling RubyCentral and thus the ruby ecosystem. Money makes the world go round. I don't think this complaint is really down to the GPL. The GPL is strict; it ensures that corporations need to open up their own modifications. > And so yes, despite all this, I (still) love Linux. I don't have any "love" for Linux as such. I simply think it is a good operating system. It is also a tinker-friendly operating system. I significantly prefer ruby as such; I also would not say I "love" ruby, but ruby is a very well-designed language (even ignoring the meta-influence by the shopify overlord). At the end of the day, though, these are just tools. They do things. They ideally help save time and cost. Having the same in the Windows world is not really possible, not even via WSL. WSL just makes windows suck less but windows still sucks immensely; I know because I also use windows almost daily. And I use ruby there too, which makes windows suck less, but it's not a great experience compared to linux. > Because it has been my life companion for 30 years and has contributed significantly to putting food on the table and letting me sleep soundly. Because it allowed me to study without spending insane amounts on licenses or manuals. Because it taught me, first, to think outside the box. To be free. > So thank you, GNU/Linux. It's a strange summary to me. I also call Linux just Linux, without the prefaced GNU. I understand RMS; I just don't think you need to fight in an ideological way. Let the facts and advantages speak for themselves - that suffices. And pick the right licence too. But ... "life companion"? What does that even mean? And what does "to be free" even mean? You still depend on code written by other people. So you depend on those people too. It's better than depending on Microsoft, but I don't fully understand that blog entry really.