this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
454 points (79.9% liked)

Technology

63186 readers
3482 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] the_doktor@lemmy.zip 0 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago) (1 children)

You mean the entire fucking world where *BSD is basically dead and Linux is fucking everywhere? Yeah... sure, buddy.

*BSD has always been a poor alternative to Linux because of design decisions, poor hardware support, and a garbage license that allows non-free software to "steal" (take) and use your code irresponsibly. *BSD sucks.

Someone is just jealous of Linux's success but is so caught up being a contrarian shitlord that they can't admit the truth.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 0 points 4 hours ago

You mean the entire fucking world where *BSD is basically dead and Linux is fucking everywhere? Yeah… sure, buddy.

This is not a valid argument and also you are quite ignorant of what's everywhere and what is dead.

*BSD has always been a poor alternative to Linux

The other way around technically, one came before the other and was a more mature system, with ongoing lawsuits however.

Also SunOS 4 and Ultrix are BSD, if you didn't know. Commercial high-end OSes before Linux even started. About "poor alternatives".

because of design decisions,

You don't know what you're talking about, anything but this argument. BSDs' design decisions allow them to solve the same problems orders of magnitude cheaper (in human effort) than Linux. That's how they still survive.

Under FreeBSD there are GEOM, netgraph, properly working ZFS since long ago, proper separation of base system and packages, the ports system, Linux emulation for legacy software, all orderly and clean. Under Linux the horrible mess starts with Debian netinstall.

By the way, you don't even know your own team, Eric S. Raymond of the "cathedral vs bazaar" glory notoriously disagreed with you, despite the comparison being supposed to put Linux on top. His point was that if you allow thousands of monkey developers, they might not do things so well, but they'll do so much more that it's justified, and thus Linux wins due to having shittier architecture, but developing faster.

poor hardware support,

Go use Windows then, it has almost perfect hardware support.

and a garbage license that allows non-free software to “steal” (take) and use your code irresponsibly.

So Google uses GPL code responsibly, right? Microsoft? Apple? Meta?

This argument is obsolete.

I dunno where the circus is, but the clowns are already here.