# freebsd desktop



## mbernat37 (Aug 12, 2017)

I would like to find out because I'm worried one thing or freebsd is better for the desktop than linux if such a thread was moved then sorry and please understand for thanks


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Aug 12, 2017)

mbernat37 said:


> I would like to find out


Perhaps if you told us what it is that you would like to find out, somebody would be able to give you an intelligent answer. 

The handbook probably has what you are looking for. See here: 5.7. Desktop Environments.


----------



## wolffnx (Aug 13, 2017)

mbernat37 said:


> I would like to find out because I'm worried one thing or *freebsd is better for the desktop than linux* if such a thread was moved then sorry and please understand for thanks



i dont think so, the 90% depend upon the graphic card drivers,nvidia and intel drivers runs fine..better nvidia.
there is no window manager that run better on Linux o FreeBSD,same for
the applications(file managers,terminal emulator,etc), except for a few applications that have no support
like opera(i miss it....)
and for the "base" system,well,i am a ex Linux user(10/15/years) and i not find any diference with Linux,everything runs just like is suppose to do

but if you make me choise, a choise FreeBSD


----------



## Russ Perkins (Aug 13, 2017)

I don't think it's better or worse. It's a matter of choice. Both have strengths, it's about what you want and are willing and able to do. Sometimes hardware will cause you to stumble, find a work around. Sometimes you break things and have to fix them. I run both on the same hardware and like them both, at this point more partial to FreeBSD I just wish I could run the latest version of Opera but that's another story.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Aug 13, 2017)

mbernat37 said:


> I would like to find out because I'm worried one thing or freebsd is better for the desktop than linux if such a thread was moved then sorry and please understand for thanks



Better as in Ford vs Chevrolet?  Pepsi vs Coke?

I have 4 laptops running FreeBSD and 0 running Linux, if that's any indication, and I'm not missing out on anything I want to do on them


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Aug 13, 2017)

Trihexagonal said:


> Better as in Ford vs Chevrolet? Pepsi vs Coke?


Yeah, I drive a 1987 Chrysler K-car and run FreeBSD. Make of that what you want.


----------



## stratacast1 (Aug 13, 2017)

I used to be Linux-only, but open minded to FreeBSD. However, now I prefer FreeBSD on servers and like the idea of it on a workstation, but not a personal computer. For me, too much stuff is missing such as KDE Plasma 5 (area51 doesn't count), Firefox Nightly, Spotify, and some others. If FreeBSD was equally supported in what software is available like with Linux I would definitely switch my own machines. For now though, FreeBSD server all the way


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Aug 13, 2017)

stratacast1 said:


> For me, too much stuff is missing such as KDE Plasma 5 (area51 doesn't count), Firefox Nightly, *Spotify*, and some others.



Does www/nuvolaplayer-spotify work for you?

I used to have multimedia/xmms scrobble to last.fm but gave up my account long before the Spotify transition.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Aug 13, 2017)

The majority of users don't use KDE anything or Firefox Nightly and there is a decent spotify player mentioned so most people, such as myself, are perfectly happy with FreeBSD as their desktop.


----------



## stratacast1 (Aug 13, 2017)

Trihexagonal said:


> Does www/nuvolaplayer-spotify work for you?



I've never tried that before or heard of it, I'll take a look at it, I did see there is a web client for Spotify now too but I never tried it vs. the client that Linux/Mac OSX/Windows has.



drhowarddrfine said:


> The majority of users don't use KDE anything or Firefox Nightly and there is a decent spotify player mentioned so most people, such as myself, are perfectly happy with FreeBSD as their desktop.



Probably the majority of users on FreeBSD, but a lot of Linux users have transitioned to KDE Plasma 5, myself included. I require Firefox Nightly 1 to help test upcoming releases of Firefox and 2 there are features in Nightly that I like that won't come to stable until many months later, but Nightly users indeed are a minority. Something like music I can fudge on, but those are the 2 things I primarily require that FreeBSD sadly doesn't have. That's cool you're happy with FreeBSD as a desktop OS, I wish I could be personally  it's a great platform


----------



## Loala (Aug 13, 2017)

I used to use Debian and Arch linux but now use FreeBSD.
Before I properly configured my laptop, I felt bit laggy but after I went through the handbook, other docs and forum articles and finished to fix settings, I feel my laptop works much faster and smoother than was with those linux distros.
Another pros I think is that configuration is much much cleaner and easier. So it is easy and needs little effort to maintain upgrades and stuff.
And as far as the device settings and prefixes, in FreeBSD it is more correctly working with my hardware than in linux, plus the way userland working is very logical, so it is very easy to know how system is working for me.
For applications support, All of the programs I use is in packages and working great so I don't feel any trouble with that.

The only lagging point of FreeBSD than linux I found so far is a lack of suspend to disk (s4).
I could use suspend to disk with linuxes without any trouble and it was really useful. I would say it is sort of critical as for the Desktops... But I know that is not implemented yet for FreeBSD.

Except that, I satisfy with every other things so much about FreeBSD so I decided to stick with FreeBSD anyway..


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Aug 13, 2017)

stratacast1 said:


> Probably the majority of users on FreeBSD, but a lot of Linux users have transitioned to KDE Plasma 5


Do you have a count? I'd bet most don't. But it's not a FreeBSD problem directly. It's a problem getting someone to port it.


stratacast1 said:


> but Nightly users indeed are a minority


As I said. I'm a web developer and run a company with 10 developers and we don't use it either. But I've read, in the past, that people have gotten Nightly to work by just downloading and compiling it. It seems that, years ago, I did it myself but don't recall.


----------



## rorgoroth (Aug 13, 2017)

Plese don't kill me anyone but...

I used Linux for 8 years on the desktop, FreeBSD for 2 and have now been using Windows 10 for 2 on my desktop and OS X on laptop for 4.

I think FreeBSD is the "worst" or most trouble and requires the most compromises, even more than Linux does. Perhaps because I have little time these days, gotten lazy and my life has changed but I'd rather not use my desktop computer than have it crippled by Linux or FreeBSD ever again.


----------



## aimeec1995 (Aug 13, 2017)

mbernat37 said:


> I would like to find out because I'm worried one thing or freebsd is better for the desktop than linux if such a thread was moved then sorry and please understand for thanks



FreeBSD on the desktop is about as good as linux on the desktop was 10 years ago.
I still like it way more, though.


----------



## Russ Perkins (Aug 13, 2017)

rorgoroth said:


> Plese don't kill me anyone but...
> 
> I used Linux for 8 years on the desktop, FreeBSD for 2 and have now been using Windows 10 for 2 on my desktop and OS X on laptop for 4.
> 
> I think FreeBSD is the "worst" or most trouble and requires the most compromises, even more than Linux does. Perhaps because I have little time these days, gotten lazy and my life has changed but I'd rather not use my desktop computer than have it crippled by Linux or FreeBSD ever again.



And yet you are here


----------



## rorgoroth (Aug 13, 2017)

Russ Perkins said:


> And yet you are here


Well yes... I still own a server and it still very much runs FreeBSD but this topic is about desktop opinions


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Aug 13, 2017)

rorgoroth said:


> Plese don't kill me anyone but...
> 
> I used Linux for 8 years on the desktop, FreeBSD for 2 and have now been using Windows 10 for 2 on my desktop and OS X on laptop for 4.
> 
> I think FreeBSD is the "worst" or most trouble and requires the most compromises, even more than Linux does. Perhaps because I have little time these days, gotten lazy and my life has changed but I'd rather not use my desktop computer than have it crippled by Linux or FreeBSD ever again.


 
Not everyone is cut out for the red pill...







It's possible that you, my friend, are more suited for the blue pill.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Aug 13, 2017)

rorgoroth said:


> I think FreeBSD is the "worst" or most trouble and requires the most compromises, even more than Linux does.


Personal preference is totally cool, but apart from that, what you say doesn't make any sense to me. I use both and they both work out of the box. No work. Just use it. It is of course always possible to _make_ work.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Aug 13, 2017)

I'll repeat what I always say. FreeBSD is a professional operating system for professionals and serious amateurs. Too many people come in here looking for an alternative to some other OS and want it to work the same or similar and easier. If that's their goal, they came here for all the wrong reasons unless they are a professional looking for a professional operating system. In which case, you can have everything you want in an OS.


----------



## Birdy (Aug 14, 2017)

The blue pill looks particularly gruesome to swallow.


----------



## stratacast1 (Aug 14, 2017)

drhowarddrfine said:


> Do you have a count? I'd bet most don't. But it's not a FreeBSD problem directly. It's a problem getting someone to port it.
> 
> As I said. I'm a web developer and run a company with 10 developers and we don't use it either. But I've read, in the past, that people have gotten Nightly to work by just downloading and compiling it. It seems that, years ago, I did it myself but don't recall.



I know one of the biggest reasons Plasma isn't ported is because it is heavily dependent on systemd, so I can see why no one is all that interested in doing the job. I don't think I'd want to compile my web browser every morning  for those reasons and others, Linux will remain my desktop OS, Windows for gaming, Mac OS X (if I can afford one again) for a good laptop OS to keep me in the loop of things and FreeBSD for my servers


----------



## Sensucht94 (Aug 14, 2017)

drhowarddrfine said:


> I'll repeat what I always say. FreeBSD is a professional operating system for professionals and serious amateurs. Too many people come in here looking for an alternative to some other OS and want it to work the same or similar and easier. If that's their goal, they came here for all the wrong reasons unless they are a professional looking for a professional operating system. In which case, you can have everything you want in an OS.



Personally, I feel kind of forced to disagree on that. There's nothing like 'professional OS for professionals' stated on the system's Main Page, nor in the Handbook, nor in the Forums.
I think you're the only one who keeps assessing that, hence this should be recognized as a personal point of view.
You could say instead that FreeBSD, being a solid professional system, is one of the best choices for professional and that would be correct.

I'm not a professional, I'm a common user, what I do in life has nothing to share with informatics and computers.

Although it's been years since I first tried FreeBSD, I signed up in that forum only recently. Why?

The handbook and the answered threads on the forums provided any info I needed in order to solve any doubt and work out any kind of problem.

This won't prevent me from asking something in future, if I won't be able to solve the problem by myself,  and (provided that it won't be a stupid question) you, as a professional, will probably be able to teach me something, if you'll be that kind to answer. 

Anyway, now I find myself really comfortable with FreeBSD, I love it and use it as my only OS on my desktop and on a old laptop. When I am with my sister's Mac, I use it as If it were BSD, with xorg+xfce+Darwin's macports instead quartz+aqua+apple's apps.

What's more, some friends of mine (not professionals) who used to run Linux, became interested in FreeBSD, after having seen on my pc, and ended up being very satisfied after they gave it a try.

On one hand I recon FreeBSD is not for beginners, whereas it ain't surely as user-friendly as Win/OS X/Debian-Mint-Ubuntu-Elementary
It's true as well that in order to avoid wasting time at the beginning, basical experience with command line and Unix-like systems is a precious advantage.

However on the other hand, if FreeBSD were that difficult to be professional-only, then Arch, Gentoo, Slackware, Suse, Fedora, CentOS, Manjaro,  and many other Linux-Distros, as well as PC-BSD, MidnightBSD, DragonflyBSD, not forgetting Solaris' derivatives, should be all considered 'professional-only', since, for instance, I had harder times with Slack than with FreeBSD.

How much does it take to learn how to install Arch correctly and make it bootable with UEFI? Less than FreeBSD perhaps? Don't think so

Are all those OSes used just by professionals?

Before starting using Linux I used to run MS-DOS and, later on,windows Me as a child. Were those less 'professional'? For me not. I didn't have 'professional' parents to help,they didn't even know what a computer was, still I used it, I was given a possibility to learn, I had a lot of fun, and made my computer work

Then I decided to switch to Linux and installed Corel. Wasn't back then Linux too professional for a newbie? Has this prevented any DOS/Windows user from installing it during 00's?
And now that Corel and Red Hat do not exist any longer, do you expect me to use Ubuntu/Mint just because I'm no professional? I think most of people who used Linux for quite some time, if forced to deal with Ubuntu,  would like to drop it off for something less easy, but hell, all the way better (my opinion).

Now I use FreeDOS for gaming and for running legacy software I like. I prefer it over dosbox and virtualbox. Isn't that too professional for you?

I think that FreeBSD is a perfect choice for everybody who does not expect things to be pre-packaged.
If I were called up to  answer to 'which professional system is supposed to be for professionals only', I would speak of Windows Server with power shell as interface, or IBM's AIX, maybe OpenBSD but definitely not FreeBSD.

In my opinion that perspective of yours ('few but good') if shared by all developers Deamons and moderators, would cut off half of the FreeBSD community,, and hold back FreeBSD from  spreading wider.
However that perspective might not be shared by everyone, and, therefore, there's no point in claiming it to be sacred truth
 It's not different from the perspective of a veteran CS-GO player who flames newbies, without earning anything from that.
Curiosity, will to  listen and to learn should be always appreciated. You're not obliged to read  thoroughly threads you consider 'not professional', neither you have to feel forced to answer them


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Aug 14, 2017)

stratacast1 said:


> I know one of the biggest reasons Plasma isn't ported is because it is heavily dependent on systemd


Well, there ya' go.

Sensucht94 If you read my earlier post, you would have seen I also say "and serious amateurs". The rest of your post is only things I agree with and often say myself so we are in agreement on everything.



Sensucht94 said:


> and hold back FreeBSD from spreading wider.


To an extent, I would hope so. Already I have seen an influx of Linux people, for many reasons, who want FreeBSD to behave just like Linux and be the next XBox. What I would hope for, instead, is more of those professionals with the time and energy to contribute to FreeBSD to join the developers and make it better.


----------



## Deleted member 9563 (Aug 14, 2017)

Sensucht94 said:


> Now I use FreeDOS for gaming and for running legacy software I like.


I just wanted to say that I'm also a DOS fan. I was around on the freedos forum when it was first being discussed and there was still no working version, so I'm quite familiar with it. Still, I prefer MS-DOS 3.21 or for every day use, 6.22. And yes, I _do_ use it every day for very practical things. I'm not a gamer though. The reason I mention all this is because coming from DOS, and as an amateur, FreeBSD feels very comfortable.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Aug 14, 2017)

Sensucht94 said:


> On one hand I recon FreeBSD is not for beginners, whereas it ain't surely as user-friendly as Win/OS X/Debian-Mint-Ubuntu-Elementary
> It's true as well that in order to avoid wasting time at the beginning, basical experience with command line and Unix-like systems is a precious advantage.



The tutorial I wrote targets that minority, however small as it might be, and tedious for experienced users to read through:



> I'm going to guide you though the process of getting a fully functional FreeBSD desktop up and running, complete with system files and security settings, step-by-step as if you've never used UNIX or the command line.



Beginners Guide - How To Set Up A FreeBSD Desktop From Scratch

I've been interested in FreeBSD since 1998 but having only used an Apple II and Windows at that point the install screens in the Handbook looked archaic and beyond my skill set at the time to set up. If there had been a tutorial that spelled it out step-by-step like I attempt to do I probably would have taken the plunge. I can usually figure things out for myself and rarely ask a question, but I no doubt would have been full of them then.

IMO it's counterproductive to attempt to deter or exclude new users and am not sure that's what the developers have in mind or say where their opinion lies on the subject.

It's a given that as TrueOS becomes more popular there will be an influx of people who want to try vanilla FreeBSD (PC-BSD is how I got here), that in the end will find Linux, or even Windows, preferable and decide to go back to it after some discord in the forums. Think of it as the growth pains that we as its users experience as FreeBSD grows.

On the other end of the spectrum lies stagnancy. How many times in the last few weeks have you read where someone said that FreeBSD is behind Linux in some form or fashion? I can point you to a few, one as recently as yesterday. But no matter what, it is never going to be for everybody nor should it try to be.

When you stop to think about it the analogy of the Red Pill and the Blue Pill isn't that far off.

The Red Pill implies Freedom. Freedom to choose and break free, and with that choice comes what can be the harsh reality that this may take a little work, but with that work you learn to bend the system to your will and become its master.

With the Blue Pill the system becomes the real Administrator with its forced updates, false sense of security (we know what's best for you) and comfy GUI, all the while you're being used, tracked and spoon fed by the system.


----------



## max21 (Aug 15, 2017)

I understand.  It takes years to get to know FreeBSD.  I thought about it for 20 years and I dived in (landing on my a**) about 10 years ago.  It took millions of minds to biuld it.  I been to hell and back, now I got a clue.

He don’t change much, even for us, because he knows he's a oldy but goodie.  Anyway, if you still love Windows-XP as I do, just put it in a VM with FreeBSD as host.  FreeBSD with PF will be his best friend ever.  If you love Fedora-12, (the only one that was as fast as XP) well it don’t work anymore.  It had a trick in it (mbr/hdd smarts) to keep it from running as a virtual machine inside Virtualbox and more.  It ran Gnome-2 and all apts faster then a bat-out-of-hell and XP.

Other than those few, the desktop been dying ever since (but the youngest will never know it).  The owners decided the next generation of power users will only be using webtop, that function like a smart-phones or tablets.  Now you to got to hit 6 buttons or make many swipes to do what you use to do with a single click.  Now you have to drill down into the system for every single thing you need to do.  And to think people got the nerve to complain about FreeBSD mate-desktop functionally.  It is BETTER than that, and you can build upon it.  But not Gnome-3 or Windows.  Anyway, the fact was they knew that the Webtop will dominate the entire industry and XP or Fedora types can’t do the job.  That why you now have Gnome-3 and Winodows-10.  They are ready for action, but they are a soooooo boring.  But the youngsters will think it’s a gift.  But FreeBSD has all of that already, a taste of boring with PF to boot.  If some one is trying, I bet it be better than android.    With 50 – 100 true GB per second coming to all, FreeBSD is already build for the webtop plus with real jails running every type of server one could imagine.  It only goes to prove, no tech can do it all, but at least FreeBSD comes closers then all the rest …  all for FREE, forever.  _*That is why we must donate whatever and whenever we can.* _BTW: How much is a Windows Server License per year these days?  Do it still come with unknown-tracker to keep an eye on it users?  Do it do it better then systemd?

Smart business people plans for the next generation (). The best was full of common-sense, and that will/has been taken away until quantum change it back.

... and that's a fact!


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Aug 15, 2017)

I once read a quote by some Einstein-ish type person who said something along the lines of "Science never changes. If you base what you do on the science, you're set for life." Or was it fundamentals of science? Or it changes slowly. Don't recall.  It's why I chose FreeBSD. For those values.


----------



## Sensucht94 (Aug 16, 2017)

drhowarddrfine said:


> If you read my earlier post, you would have seen I also say "and serious amateurs". The rest of your post is only things I agree with and often say myself so we are in agreement on everything.



Drhowarddrfine, to be honest, I hadn't missed that line, however I wasn't sure about the extent to which your 'serious amateurs' definition would include common users. Since it wasn't the first time you were arguing on that topic,  I simply whished you would explain and clarify your point of view, which is what you've done.
Now I can understand your opinion, and guess I mostly share it too



drhowarddrfine said:


> To an extent, I would hope so. Already I have seen an influx of Linux people, for many reasons, who want FreeBSD to behave just like Linux and be the next XBox. What I would hope for, instead, is more of those professionals with the time and energy to contribute to FreeBSD to join the developers and make it better.



Really, like you,  I would never hope FreeBSD to behave like Linux, otherwise I would  be using Linux at the moment, instead I'm writing this from BSD.
Linux has indeed its own pros, and that's why I kept it in a couple of computers, but, long story short we all know why we prefer BSD most of times.

If BSD's community would start being like Linux's, I would be really disappointed. I cannot stand as well people who install a less common system just to appear 'alternative' or 'cool', then,later on, they sign up on the forum before ever opening the handbook/instructions/wiki,  just in order to bash it, expecting it to behave like windows.
The result always consists  a of the forum and/or the IRC channel becoming as futile and stupid as yahoo answers. This is an issue that affects all Linux distros, and fortunately FreeBSD's community (one of the reason which I like that system best for) still resists and has not given in that bad influence, thanks to all the 'professionals' and the 'serious amateurs' you mentioned.

However I really wish  there would be a way to make FreeBSD spread wider, without changing it or ruining its oasis of peace.
Consequently,  I hope  more people (especially more 'common users' like me) to start appreciating BSD the way it is; this purpose still induce me to talk about FreeBSD to some people  (practically  only Linux/OS X users*** who seem to be 'professionals'  or 'serious/intermediate amateurs) during free time, to talk over about its features, how it is and works, and to help them correctly configure a working desktop envronment.
Similarly, I really hate sometimes when a newcomer makes a clearly 'noob-like question' and he's critized and made fun of because of that. Sometimes they just post unproductive threads, but in other occasion it's clear they're sincerely asking for help and did that the wrong way.
In those cases I suggest we should help them and be patient, as they're beginners, not answer them in a cold, annoyed manner.

To sum up, we agree about everything , like you said, I just wanted you to be more clear, and perhaps I've been far too impolite replying you the first time

***I do not know much about Windows NT, bu in my experience I discoverd that Windows users are the least interested in something like BSD



OJ said:


> The reason reason I mention all this is because coming from DOS, and as an amateur, FreeBSD feels very comfortable.



Yeah, it's really strange, as we're comparing Unix to Microsoft's systems.

However the freedom you get when you use FreeBSD, the simplicity of tuning with configuration files and  fixing problems, the transparency of an OS that puts everything under your very eyes, really resembles DOS'.

Nothing feels like DOS as FreeBSD, despite all the differences and the fact BSD is a modern,up to date OS.

Still, in spite of that, you will probably agree when I say that those rc.conf  and loader.conf really remind me somehow of the old but gold autoexec.bat and config.sys, and provide nowadays the same  sensation  of safety and, at the same time, freedom, the latter couple used to give us.



Trihexagonal said:


> The tutorial I wrote targets that minority, however small as it might be, and tedious for experienced users to read through:
> 
> Beginners Guide - How To Set Up A FreeBSD Desktop From Scratch



Just given a look at it, nice job, really



Trihexagonal said:


> It's a given that as TrueOS becomes more popular there will be an influx of people who want to try vanilla FreeBSD (PC-BSD is how I got here), that in the end will find Linux, or even Windows, preferable and decide to go back to it after some discord in the forums. Think of it as the growth pains that we as its users experience as FreeBSD grows.
> 
> On the other end of the spectrum lies stagnancy. How many times in the last few weeks have you read where someone said that FreeBSD is behind Linux in some form or fashion? I can point you to a few, one as recently as yesterday. But no matter what, it is never going to be for everybody nor should it try to be.
> 
> When you stop to think about it the analogy of the Red Pill and the Blue Pill isn't that far off.



Trihexagonal thanks for your reply. As always your answer provide useful info,  an interesting and intuitive reflection, nice tips and a source to start from when opening new threads. I take my chance now to thank you for all your effort as you did with DutchDaemon.

The pills analogy of Matrix suits FreeBSD amazingly well. I wouldn't be able of thinking of a better metaphor. And yes, as I said to drhowarddrfine above, I understand too that the red pill is not for everyone


----------



## Jeckt (Aug 16, 2017)

stratacast1 said:


> I know one of the biggest reasons Plasma isn't ported is because it is heavily dependent on systemd


My main desktop system is Gentoo without systemd, and it runs plasma 5 fine (or at least is as buggy as it always was).  Due to the very small minority of non systemd Linux distros these days, I doubt they wrote an entire shim layer themselves.  I'm sure it's littered with Linuxisms all over the place, but I don't think systemd is a show stopper.


----------

