# I think, at this stage, I am finally convinced that FreeBSD is not ready for all desktop users.



## mzs47 (Jan 28, 2021)

I have been a regular FreeBSD user since 2016 , I have ran it on work laptops(dual booted with Debian, for VoIP  and on various desktops and have advocated about it, blogged about Jails, and filed bug reports on bugzilla and some third-party projects to get the OS supported. Tried to "do my bit", wherever I can.

Why? I am a strong believer in user's choice and more than the license of OS(it should be Libre, that is all), I wanted a viable alternative OS.

Compared to other BSDs, OpenIndian, Minix and GNU/Hurd, FreeBSD has most of the things that make it very viable, the sheer number of apps that are updated regularly(It is fresh like Fedora), the enterprise like features, a wholesome general purpose OS that has the reliability like Debian, and most importantly a supportive community for a user's journey, I have personally experienced this. (Thanks to all of you! 

As a result I have always ignored the reviews and articles that contained the statement - 'FreeBSD is for servers and GNU/Linux for Desktops', believing that it is just a matter of time that FreeBSD will bubble up like GNU/Linux did, until now.

Now, coming to what made me loose confidence - Since couple of days I have faced the issue of suspend to memory(RAM) not working on a Ivy Bridge desktop with HD graphics(~ 8 years old now). I have read the wiki and it does support this on some Laptops, but not on desktops? I tried Debian on the same PCs and it "just worked".

You see, I never had to use this feature till now(always used to turn the PC off after work/play), as I finally bought a UPS that allows me to keep the PCs running without interruptions or shutting down for extended periods. 
And suspend to RAM is really required in this case, to save energy and to resume from where a user left, instead of starting all applications anew. 
I make use of this feature on the work laptop with Debian stable and I have been able to reach ~100 days without shutting down, until the kernel upgrades land.

In the past, I have ignored many other issues, like the wireless cards issues/not working, all laptop/multimedia keys not supported, VoIP apps support is patchy, etc. 
But for this one my thought went like - "If FreeBSD does not support such a crucial thing on old hardware that is common unlike GPUs/Wireless, what is the priority for this project ? Will this feature ever be supported? Maybe it is like others observed, FreeBSD is only for servers that don't need this?".

Maybe one day FreeBSD will support this, but for now it is not viable for all users.


----------



## kpedersen (Jan 28, 2021)

mzs47 said:


> Now, coming to what made me loose confidence - Since couple of days I have faced the issue of suspend to memory(RAM) not working on a Ivy Bridge desktop with HD graphics(~ 8 years old now). I have read the wiki and it does support this on some Laptops, but not on desktops? I tried Debian on the same PCs and it "just worked".



Hardware is always an issue for free operating systems (I have countless hardware that works badly with FreeBSD). This is usually where I state that macOS would do a much worse job of suspending to ram on your exact same hardware. In fact, macOS probably wouldn't even boot on that machine. and yet it is very popular as a consumer desktop operating system.

Yes, it may seem obvious as to why (Apple wants money) and yet we seem to expect projects with vastly less resources to support *more* than the commercial, well funded counter-parts? The same sits true with Windows. FreeBSD supports far more hardware than Window 10 because it doesn't abandon non profitable hardware unlike consumer Windows.

My advice is, choose the OS you want to use, and then buy the hardware that makes it work. It is a little bit unsatisfactory to think this way, but if something doesn't work; rip it out and replace it with something more appropriate. Second hand hardware in this day and age is almost free.

People may believe that an OS with a lack of hardware support will slowly die but I don't believe this to be the case. FreeBSD will likely support *every* generation of future hardware but a slightly smaller subset of that generation. So simply buy wisely.

Edit: I would also add that I have some hardware that works in FreeBSD but not Linux. In some ways it is just luck of the draw


----------



## Factor (Jan 28, 2021)

As new person (me) your feedback is valuable.  I have read lots of stories of people using FreeBSD on desktops and laptops.  I came from and still currently using Linux and Mac on the desktop.  Stopped using windows like 2 decades ago unless I was forced to (work). I always as an outsider who read posts over the years here always assumed those that built desktops/laptops on FreeBSD were nerds (like me) and just wanted to.  I think some of this is steeped in the if they can (linux) we can too.  However something my dad told me sort of echoes in my head "Son use the right tool for the job".  FreeBSD's motto is "The Power to Serve."  I always assumed it meant for Servers and such.  That said I never considered it as a viable option for desktop.  Can it be a desktop sure could it be better sure.  In general again just a simple guy on the outside looking in seems to me FreeBSD is for Servers.  Also so most dont get me wrong I think the FreeBSD team could make it become anything they wanted it to become.  It's not that it not doable I just dont see it as a goal they have.

Where ever you are I hope you and everyone you know is well.


----------



## sidetone (Jan 28, 2021)

I saw a thread on here with a link, that a developer for video graphics drivers on FreeBSD was frustrated that his work for it wasn't acknowledged, and how companies that used his improvements made money but didn't give back to the project which made improvements. The person said, I'll work on a project when I feel like it (as if it were a hobby), and not be so eager which companies make a profit from and won't give back. I wasn't able to find this thread or link at a later time. GPL also gets those improvements, and doesn't allow their code back into FreeBSD.

It's everyone's choice what to use. Enough works on FreeBSD now. The difference in price from a free OS to a paid one is also less than some video cards that do enough.

Suspend RAM on a videocard is an advanced feature, which it seems like the priority was to get a card to work with enough features for good enough video graphics. NVidia provides their own closed source drivers for FreeBSD: an Nvidia user may be better able to give better information about the capability of those features.

Bluetooth past version 2 is what doesn't work, and perhaps on Linux as well.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jan 28, 2021)

If you're expecting people to give derivative work or monetary incentive back for the free work you contribute; then they should probably re-evaluate why they choose to do copy-center open source to begin with, or use the GPL (and subsequenlty other open source platforms). I don't understand this sentiment at all.

To the OP: 

I agree. Especially with the bluetooth (I hate wires) and suspend/resume part. Crucial work is missing.


----------



## sidetone (Jan 28, 2021)

Beastie7 said:


> If you're expecting people to give derivative work or monetary incentive back for the free work you contribute; then they should probably re-evaluate why they choose to do copy-center open source to begin with, or use the GPL (and subsequenlty other open source platforms). I don't understand this sentiment at all.


An attitude like that, is a statement in support of: FreeBSD deserves to be killed off. It doesn't. The statement is also in support of: FreeBSD shouldn't get donations either.


----------



## richardtoohey2 (Jan 28, 2021)

My Mac's bluetooth audio plays up. iTunes or Music or whatever is called doesn't show some tracks I've purchased on my iPad. My Microsoft Surface Windows 10 tablet used to refuse to connect to Wifi after going to sleep - I had to reboot to get it to connect again. Some recent update seems to have fixed that. My Mint install on an HP laptop sometimes ends up with broken packages. My OpenBSD machines wifi is always sporadic so I often to have to bring the wireless down & back up again. My Intel NUC seems to have thermal issues.

Nothing's perfect.


----------



## Mjölnir (Jan 28, 2021)

Show me a BIOS that strictly conforms to the standard specs...  there's very likely none.  Open source OSs rely on conformance to the published standards, and include _quirks_ to cope with known incompatibilities.  Linux, as a widely deployed OS, has far more of those _quirks_ included than any other open source OS.  That's why on your machine _suspend to RAM_ works on Linux, but not on FreeBSD.
EDIT You can try if hibernation (_suspend to disk_ (dedicated partition)) works.  Look in the _howto_ section of the forum.EDIT


----------



## Beastie7 (Jan 28, 2021)

sidetone said:


> An attitude like that, is a statement in support of: FreeBSD deserves to be killed off. It doesn't. The statement is also in support of: FreeBSD shouldn't get donations either.


You misunderstand. There's a difference between simply asking for donations or contributed work, and doing work *with the expectation *that people *should* give back or give you money for it. The FreeBSD Foundation does none of the latter. There is a clause in the BSD license that states those who use BSD licensed software to acknowledge the author of the original work involved. That is all someone needs.


----------



## sidetone (Jan 28, 2021)

richardtoohey2 said:


> My OpenBSD machines wifi is always sporadic so I often to have to bring the wireless down & back up again. My Intel NUC seems to have thermal issues.
> 
> Nothing's perfect.


Add BSSID, set a dedicated channel, and other specific arguments to wpa_supplicant.conf and rc.conf. It limits the work and finding the card has to do, even on already established connections, and should help a lot with sporadic wifi.

My wifi on FreeBSD seemed to work a whole lot better after setting those arguments, but they had to be correct.


----------



## sidetone (Jan 28, 2021)

I think they should get some appreciation, but monetary is not a given. Not a lot, but a little bit of monetary is reasonable for past work.

I think the person can say, I did this, show appreciation here. Because a lot of people don't know, or attribute it to a different or bigger project. And for more, based on what they've done (like an item on a resume), they'll accept bounties for future work.

I believe it deserves to be appreciated to some extent. At one point, we shouldn't support one piece of work by someone, to the point that makes them a millionaire.


----------



## Factor (Jan 28, 2021)

Ok this is so cool...  What I notice here is you all don't just agree it could be bad and move on...  You all just jump in and give him suggestions how to make it better for him now.  Wow just wow..  

I am so mad now at myself that I wasn't here 20 years ago...


----------



## kpedersen (Jan 28, 2021)

richardtoohey2 said:


> My OpenBSD machines wifi is always sporadic so I often to have to bring the wireless down & back up again.


Mine was too since around 6.2. Turns out it was the mode used (a, b, g, n). With the default mode (probably trying n), after a while I would get booted. If yours is the same, perhaps you can try the same fix:


```
# ifconfig iwn0 mode 11g
```

I love that OpenBSD doesn't frig around with wpa_supplicant but often FreeBSD's stack does end up to be more reliable for me. I have an Atheros card on a Thinkpad Z60 that outright kernel panics as soon as I bring it up on OpenBSD. Works great on FreeBSD and *ehem* Windows XP.


----------



## ShelLuser (Jan 28, 2021)

In my biased opinion open source in general isn't ready for the desktop.

Simply because it requires you - as a programmer - to think outside your own bubble and try to imagine what others might want from it. You'll also need to swallow your own pride so to speak and accept that when people dislike your idea of the ideal IDE then it might be better to adapt instead of trying to enforce what you think is best.

But with open source it's more than often a one way street. Part of that (which is my theory) is because many can't seem to make the difference between users who will like anything you do because it's free and those who are seriously using your product and only share criticism because they hope things get better. And I base that opinion on past experiences. For example.... Blender, an open source 3D modelling environment. It's good, but it's hardly user friendly. In fact, until a few years ago the project insisted that using the right mouse button to click on things (vs. the left button) was the best way to go. Who cares that the rest of the world did otherwise? Open source projects can change on a single developers whim and if you don't like that you can go fork yourself.

Yah... it took them a few years and a whole lot of criticism and banned users but amazingly enough they suddenly saw the light. I think (personal impressions) that happened when they saw their revenue go down. _Wait a second..._ Revenue and open source? 

Heck... LibreOffice considers it an important feat that they still support the PCX format. I'm not too sure about that... I take greater value in the ability to support my widescreen monitor. You know: using excess space to position pages next to each other instead of stacked...


Anyway, one thing which many (desktop) users enjoy is continuance. Don't change stuff because you need a new sales pitch but just give us more of what we love and enjoy. It took Microsoft 30 years to find out but it seems they finally got the message with Windows 10, at least that's my impression.

For the record....  I've been happily using a Linux powered KDE desktop back in 2003 for many years but eventually moved back to Windows because I had to get things done and the constant changes in the desktop environment were seriously killing my progress.

And I've only saw the same thing happening over and over again. The last disasters (IMO) were NetBeans and Gimp out of all products. Gimp is an awesome environment, don't get me wrong, but there are several niche functions which are no longer fully supported. Of course you won't find out when you merely upgrade the program but you will run into these issues when you do a fresh install. If you use those functions. Minor detailed issues, yes, but... creativity can shine or drop due to minor issues. I kinda replaced it with Photoshop Elements because of those annoyances.

Personally I highly value 2 kinds of environments. I'll take FreeBSD over Windows as a server any day of the week, but having said that I also heavily prefer Windows 10 over FreeBSD (or any other X based desktop) as a client OS just as strongly.


----------



## Speedy (Jan 28, 2021)

I never understood what is the advantage of a bloated DE, I use minimalist OpenBox with some added goodies for taskbar and quick launch and it does everything I ever need. Indeed, I never use GUI tools for system setup, I have none of those. Is this why people use Gnome and KDE, GUI tools for system?
On the other hand, doesn't Red Hat supply FBI and other gov agencies with desktop computers? I think it is all Red Hat parade there.


----------



## richardtoohey2 (Jan 28, 2021)

ShelLuser said:


> For the record.... I've been happily using a Linux powered KDE desktop back in 2003 for many years but eventually moved back to Windows because I had to get things done and the constant changes in the desktop environment were seriously killing my progress.


I know what you mean but to me it feels more that _all_ software/environments change more often than I'd like - Windows included (but also *BSD, the desktop environments, iOS, Mac, etc.).  And I think adapting to change gets more difficult as I get older!

It's good that we have choices - it means more chance that we'll find something that works for us - but sadly it would be nice to have a bit of x from Windows, y from *BSD, z from Mac, p from Gnome, q from KDE, etc.  Not one of them matches exactly what I'm looking for in terms of stability or functionality or ease-of-use or whatever and at some point they all deserve to be chucked out the window!


----------



## the3ajm (Jan 28, 2021)

I use my 2008 laptop for general desktop use mainly for browsing I'm not expecting for all my applications and hardware to work but at least it'll does what I want so going in that's the tradeoff I'm looking at. I've used Linux before and it might be more user friendly but faces similar issues so in terms of putting FreeBSD as a client OS I think it's purely for a backup on the type of things that I can do.


----------



## Factor (Jan 28, 2021)

ShelLuser said:


> in general isn't ready for the desktop.


Right there is a difference in the technical ability to be a desktop vs able to have your mother, sister and neighbor want to use it. It has to be a super easy system and have a usable ecosystem.  Not for people like us... if you can't give it to your non techy friend or spouse then it won't ever fly..  is this is what you mean when you say.


ShelLuser said:


> you - as a programmer - to think outside your own bubble and try to imagine what others might want from it.


If you go to the grocery store and stop 10 people how many will even know Linux or FreeBSD or insert open source here.  They don't.  We do sure the avarage users no...


richardtoohey2 said:


> adapting to change gets more difficult as I get older!


Me to so true.


Speedy said:


> is this why people use Gnome and KDE, GUI tools for system?


People use these because they are in the small niche of techie people who like Linux and know what it is. 
Average users dont even know what bloated is..or linux or FreeBSD.  example:  Google is always advertising the chromebook as a low cost device for people.  Do they mention it runs on open source no..  why No Brand awareness.


ShelLuser said:


> I'll take FreeBSD over Windows as a server any day of the week


For sure totally agree.


----------



## PMc (Jan 28, 2021)

mzs47 said:


> Now, coming to what made me loose confidence - Since couple of days I have faced the issue of suspend to memory(RAM) not working on a Ivy Bridge desktop with HD graphics(~ 8 years old now). I have read the wiki and it does support this on some Laptops, but not on desktops? I tried Debian on the same PCs and it "just worked".


I used this for quite a while, on  my desktop (i5-3570T on ASUS P8B75-V); I can confirm it did "just work" here with desktop.

I gave up on it because I had only one disk at that time, and a ZFS remote send/recv mirroring, and my shell script that did this, it did not like to be interrupted in midflight. Not a FreeBSD issue.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jan 29, 2021)

ShelLuser said:


> Personally I highly value 2 kinds of environments. I'll take FreeBSD over Windows as a server any day of the week, but having said that I also heavily prefer Windows 10 over FreeBSD (or any other X based desktop) as a client OS just as strongly.



I long for a Windows 7-like environment on top of FreeBSD. I really miss that OS.. Plasma is nice but I find it way too graphically bloated.


----------



## diortemew (Jan 29, 2021)

In the past month, I destroyed my Windows 10 install, and after getting FreeBSD up and running with an Nvidia GPU (which is brutally stupid), and a few weeks thereafter my Fedora Workstation install. I was strictly FreeBSD for about three weeks. Now I have FreeBSD on an old Dell AIO (it doesn't like FreeBSD, Ubuntu, Debian, Parrot, or Fedora) running non-GUI for helping me learn the server-side of the OS. I have in the past few days moved from FreeBSD back to Windows + WSL2 + Docker where I run Ubuntu 20.04 for development on the Windows side, then dual-boot into Fedora (my fave OS next to FreeBSD) which is my daily driver.

I wanted to buy an AMD card, but the crypto-farm craze has their GPUs so costly I want to puke. I wanted to move from the 8GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 to a 4GB AMD R9 290X, because the Nvidia nonsense has made my FreeBSD experience a trying one. I will not give up on FreeBSD, however, and I will continue to push my limits with it in a VM in terms of desktop setup and utilization. But I have to agree with you, using it as a desktop is difficult. I would much rather move to a single OS [FreeBSD, not GhostBSD or OpenBSD or some other derivitive] that works with my system and any GPU on the market. I don't think they are as bad off as you make it seem, but it has been trying for me when I want to make the move. I don't need Windows. And Linux is Unix at the core, then Linux next, so why settle for Linus' vision when I can stick with the OS that keeps everything neat, clear, documented, and nearly epic? I am sure they will get it together sooner than later. But they are only so many people, they will need time. And after the pandemic, maybe we'll see some changes when people's lives are not disrupted by a deadly, worldwide virus.

I can't wait to make the move. But for now, I am staying where I am comfortable, and focusing on work.

Cheers,

_diortemew


----------



## diortemew (Jan 29, 2021)

Beastie7 said:


> I long for a Windows 7-like environment on top of FreeBSD. I really miss that OS.. Plasma is nice but I find it way too graphically bloated.


Plasma is beast with the extra stuff (like the shattering windows on close), but I am with you on this: it is a bloated mess. I just tested it on a machine for a month straight, had it looking good, but went back to dwm. There is simply too much going on there. I hope they make a KDE Magma or something, where it's only the work environment and not all of the extra programs and such. I don't need 7,000 menu items or 3,000 settings columns. As amazing as it is, it sinks due to the bloat.


----------



## bsduck (Jan 29, 2021)

There is no operating system ready for all desktop users.

People have very different expectations from their desktops, and what suits the one well may not be to the liking of the other.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jan 29, 2021)

All this FreeBSD not being ready for the desktop talk drives me crazy as one who has used it as such since 2004 including my laptops.


----------



## Speedy (Jan 29, 2021)

Xorg up and running using less than 100 MiB of RAM. Does everything a computer can do. Why should I get some bloated DE? This is not a rhetorical question. I really would like to know.


----------



## shkhln (Jan 29, 2021)

diortemew said:


> because the Nvidia nonsense has made my FreeBSD experience a trying one






Am I doing this right?


----------



## richardtoohey2 (Jan 29, 2021)

diortemew said:


> because the Nvidia nonsense has made my FreeBSD experience a trying one


By that you do you mean Nvidia being not very open source friendly?


----------



## shkhln (Jan 29, 2021)

richardtoohey2 said:


> By that you do you mean Nvidia being not very open source friendly?


Note the title: https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/no-login-screen-is-nvidia-to-blame.78256/.


----------



## richardtoohey2 (Jan 29, 2021)

shkhln said:


> Note the title: https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/no-login-screen-is-nvidia-to-blame.78256/.


Thanks - but not sure after reading that thread if it was Nvidia or X or FreeBSD or a combination of all of them that made it a bit of a mission!

I vaguely remember installing Mint on machine with Nvidia and needing a bit of help from a famous search engine to get it going.

Anyway, think I'm dragging this off-topic! As with most things, YMMV.


----------



## mzs47 (Jan 29, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> My advice is, choose the OS you want to use, and then buy the hardware that makes it work. It is a little bit unsatisfactory to think this way, but if something doesn't work; rip it out and replace it with something more appropriate. Second hand hardware in this day and age is almost free.


Thanks and I tried(for IGP, Wireless and Nvidia Graphics), but we need to remember that hardware is not accessible for all users around the world, especially in developing countries. For instance, even today most of the earth's population does not even have a good internet connection(the basic thing for accessing free/libre s/w).


----------



## mzs47 (Jan 29, 2021)

PMc said:


> I used this for quite a while, on  my desktop (i5-3570T on ASUS P8B75-V); I can confirm it did "just work" here with desktop.



I have something similar, i5-3570 and the motherboard is Gigabyte b75-d3h, which has some level of Coreboot support. The issue I have seen is some mixer related message when I try to suspend.





						Board:gigabyte/ga-b75m-d3h - coreboot
					






					www.coreboot.org


----------



## kpedersen (Jan 29, 2021)

mzs47 said:


> Thanks and I tried(for IGP, Wireless and Nvidia Graphics), but we need to remember that hardware is not accessible for all users around the world, especially in developing countries. For instance, even today most of the earth's population does not even have a good internet connection(the basic thing for accessing free/libre s/w).


Very true. That said, I have an old colleague who used to work for a number of charity IT projects out in poorer countries. Apparently because all our ex-business surplus laptops (i.e 2010 ThinkPads) get sent to these countries. He said that ironically they are sometimes in a better boat than us when it comes to sourcing compatible hardware for Linux / BSD!

Also, I suppose FreeBSD beats macOS and Windows 10 by default as a superior desktop solution in those poorer countries where access to modern hardware is awkward.



mzs47 said:


> (the basic thing for accessing free/libre s/w).



I feel this is a flaw of Linux / GNU. Being tied to the internet and slurping from central package managers is a broken design that no-one seems able to fix. At least FreeBSD ports can source distfiles from distributed locations (though unfortunately so many are GitHub these days!


----------



## Jose (Jan 29, 2021)

sidetone said:


> I saw a thread on here with a link, that a developer for video graphics drivers on FreeBSD was frustrated that his work for it wasn't acknowledged, and how companies that used his improvements made money but didn't give back to the project which made improvements. The person said, I'll work on a project when I feel like it (as if it were a hobby), and not be so eager which companies make a profit from and won't give back. I wasn't able to find this thread or link at a later time. GPL also gets those improvements, and doesn't allow their code back into FreeBSD...


Perhaps of interest:





						Not merging stuff from FreeBSD-HEAD into production branches, or "hey FreeBSD-HEAD should just be production"
					

I get asked all the time why I don't backport my patches into stable FreeBSD release branches. It's a good question, so let me explain it he...




					adrianchadd.blogspot.com


----------



## Argentum (Jan 29, 2021)

drhowarddrfine said:


> All this FreeBSD not being ready for the desktop talk drives me crazy as one who has used it as such since 2004 including my laptops.


Same here. I am using FreeBSD on desktop as my main OS over a decade. Have gradually upgraded the system as FreeBSD and ports have evolved and today I have several independent installations. No big problems so far and it can only get better from here.


----------



## mzs47 (Jan 29, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> Also, I suppose FreeBSD beats macOS and Windows 10 by default as a superior desktop solution in those poorer countries where access to modern hardware is awkward.


The problem is Windows gets used as unlicensed version and that has the effect of others getting introduced and used to Windows. I broke this cycle in my Family, except for some, most of my brothers use GNU/Linux(Some version of *buntu).

Regarding the packages being available offline, I think Debian(with multiple discs), SilTaz(entire repo) and PC-BSD(with PBIs) have solved it to some extent. Things like AppImage resolved this to the end, but the adoption is not much. Sad to see PC-BSD go away, it had good aims.

Btw, AppImage creator has started developing 'hello' based on FreeBSD. 









						hello: Let’s make a FreeBSD for “mere mortals”
					

Can we make an open source system that is welcoming to swtichers from the Mac? Something that “just works” as intended, without the need…




					medium.com


----------



## Sevendogsbsd (Jan 29, 2021)

Interesting thread. I don't care about "bloat": on disk size or memory usage because the hardware I buy is always far greater than I will ever use. I care about *functionality*. Interestingly enough, On FreeBSD, I always used CWM or Fluxbox because it just felt right. On Linux, I always used KDE because it was a Swiss Army knife. 

I no longer use either as a desktop because frankly I need (and want) everything to just work and to have access to cloud data across multiple systems. OCD has a bit to do with this as well and I have solved this by taking my choices away because in the FOSS world, there are too many for me to be "settled". I exclusively use MacOS for desktops and run FreeBSD in a VM for my "lab". This was difficult for me since I have been using FOSS software and operating systems since 1998. 

I do use Windows 10 as well, but only as a gaming platform and have a dedicated machine for this. I dislike using it for anything else. 

Not saying FreeBSD, or Linux for that matter, are not desktop capable, just that I tired of trying to make disparate platforms talk to each other, dealing with minor breakages of things from time to time and never having data integration between phones and desktops. I know these things can be worked around but I don't want to anymore.


----------



## Factor (Jan 29, 2021)

Jose said:


> Perhaps of interest:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks yes interesting.  No I am no expert but seems like the FreeBSD copyright explains what happens to the code.  So to me looks a lot like complaining.  I am certainly glad he is smart enough to code.  So I am glad he can help himself and others make way in the world.  I don't think he needs to explain or complain about anything.  It's his right to contribute or not.  It his right to find someone who will pay him or not.  If he makes code and contributes it he should realize it's not really his anymore.  Its like letting go of a balloon you blew your breath into it floats along until someone pops it.  Where did your breath go..


> Well, the short-hand version is - I used to bend over backwards to try and get stuff in to stable releases of the open source software I once worked on. And that was taken advantage of by a lot of people and companies who turned around to incorporate that work into successful commercial software releases without any useful financial contribution to either myself or the project as a whole.


What did he think would happen? Did he misunderstand Greed and Pride?  The other thing is there is another side of the copyright.  The legal protection of his code harming someone or something and him getting sued.  I could be wrong here but a volunteer is just that a volunteer.

Like said I am not a coder I wish I was that smart.  I think all coders are great.  However if you code something and give it away.  Its given away.


----------



## Sevendogsbsd (Jan 29, 2021)

I don't think (IMHO) "given away" is the right phrase. In the FOSS world, coders work for the greater good of the community. This is why FOSS exists in the first place. It's a successful development model and if you look at server software on a planetary scale, FOSS runs the Internet. No other commercial software even comes close. 

Even though I am a commercial OS user, I am still a firm believer in the FOSS development model.


----------



## Factor (Jan 29, 2021)

Sevendogsbsd said:


> I don't think (IMHO) "given away" is the right phrase.


I love FOSS to and agree its a successful development model.  So what is FOSS?  What does Free Open Source Software mean?  Is it Free to see, free to read, free to reuse? Free to steal, free to loan, free to re type. I mean my point is if you choose the BSD Copyright what is prohibited?(more of a rhetorical statement for clarity)  I mean you either contributed (gave it away)  for the greater good or not? 


Sevendogsbsd said:


> Even though I am a commercial OS user, I am still a firm believer in the FOSS development model.


Me to.  Totally a believer.  I just think some people change their mind once money steps in...  I also think some forget the community is everyone with a keyboard and Eyes..  which includes people who "used the code for commercial reasons"


----------



## shkhln (Jan 29, 2021)

Factor said:


> I mean my point is if you choose the BSD Copyright what is prohibited?


Learn to read.


----------



## bsdimp (Jan 29, 2021)

Let's leave aside the wifi, bluetooth and suspend to ram issues. They are all boring on a desktop that's not a laptop. They are important for desktop on a Laptop, but irrelevant for desktop on my NUC.

The biggest issue for me that keeps me from using FreeBSD even in that environment is the upper layers. It's the same thing that keeps me using MacOS and not Linux or FreeBSD. It starts with the fact that there's no way to have universal cut and past with the same keys like you can on mac. Mac's COMMAND-C/COMMAND-V is universal. No desktop environment I've found has one that's universal. There's no way to globally set a cut and paste key and most of the envs try to follow CONTROL-C / CONTROL-V which is a terrible match for using shells to remove systems (which is why terminal programs change this)... The other commands are a crazy bodged together set of standards (we use ALT For this, but SHIFT-CTRL for that) due to historical (and now largely irrelevant) responsibilities and a strategy of avoiding conflicts by creating hassle. People that have tried to 'fix' this have done great things, but the instructions are always including changing the key bindings on a per-program basis until the problem is solved well enough. Time consuming and fragile....

So I can use my NUC just fine, but it won't replace my Mac as a daily driver because of these sorts of issues. My NUC makes a great console server when I'm popping between systems, doing some light programming or web surfing, but for anything serious the inconsistencies are rage inducing...


----------



## phalange (Jan 29, 2021)

bsdimp said:


> fact that there's no way to have universal cut and past with the same keys like you can on mac


This is demonstrably not true. I copy-paste in both FreeBSD and Linux without any problem. Between apps, into terminal emulator, back to apps.

If you're saying that the keys are not universal -- meaning ctl-c in Firefox to copy and shift-insert in xterm to paste, for example -- then that's true, but IMO that's far short of a deal breaker. These are just tiny adjustments to muscle-memory. To each their own I suppose.


----------



## kpedersen (Jan 29, 2021)

Out of all the desktop issues with free operating systems, I can't say that copy and paste is one of them. If anything, the UNIX-like middle click approach is very reliable.

Contrast this to Windows where it is ctrl-c/v for most things, except the command prompt where it is enter and right mouse. Bizarre. Luckily Microsoft are slowly catching up to modern computing and creating a much more appropriate command prompt that they plan to rent out to us.


----------



## Sevendogsbsd (Jan 29, 2021)

I never had problems copying or pasting in FreeBSD or Linux. I always used modmap (?) to change the middle click to one of the side buttons on my 200 button mouse  to paste. Easy to use and worked great.


----------



## hruodr (Jan 29, 2021)

richardtoohey2 said:


> My OpenBSD machines wifi is always sporadic so I often to have to bring the wireless down & back up again.


Unfortunately, there are problems with USB wifi devices in OpenBSD, but there are some few that work good.

I don know what is the case in FreeBSD, I always use the same run device.


----------



## scottro (Jan 29, 2021)

Generally, I've found FreeBSD wireless to be slower than Linux, but still fast enough to watch youtube videos. with no issue. By the way, to the Original Poster, you might want to edit the title of the thread as you mistyped "think" as "tink".

Anyway, each person has different desktop needs. I have been FreeBSD both as my main work and home desktop without problem for several years.
You can now, (admittedly using linux emulation) watch Netflix and Amazon prime for example, which you couldn't do before. 

There's no simple answer. If you're a developer with time, you can look at something that you need that isn't there and try to create it, but for most of us, that's not at all realistic.


----------



## Speedy (Jan 29, 2021)

> FreeBSD is not ready for all desktop users


Yeah, this is the title. Is there any operating system which is ready for* all* desktop users? Not to mention desktop environment is not part of  operating system. There are many DE-s which run on different operating systems ...


----------



## ralphbsz (Jan 30, 2021)

Speedy said:


> Xorg up and running using less than 100 MiB of RAM. Does everything a computer can do. Why should I get some bloated DE? This is not a rhetorical question. I really would like to know.


I used to run Xwindows on a 386-40 with 4MB of RAM. It ran very badly. Part of the problem was swapping; part of the problem was lack of FPU, which is needed for font rendering. I fixed that by buying a 387 floating point processor, but the machine was still barely usable due to lack of RAM. So I upgraded to a 486-25 with 16MB, and it worked acceptably. But: At that time, the only three apps that I ran on the desktop were: xclock (so I knew what time it was), xterm (for doing work, reading mail, copying data), and a huge/complex/powerful data analysis package called PAW (it later turned into ROOT, which still exists and is in use). There was no web browser at the time. Matter-of-fact, there were darn few web sites; ftp was still using 100x more traffic than http on the internet. This must have been 1994. The idea of playing live video on a computer was laughable; playing short music clips (.wav files) was at the edge of what was doable.

So: It is perfectly possible to run one or a few graphical applications that are written for a narrow use case on a small machine. The problem is that today's DEs have a much higher workload, and that is for good reason. For example, the machine I'm typing this on has 16Gig, but it also has about 50 tabs open in two web browsers (most tasks like e-mail, chat, communication are now done in web browsers), it's running a database client, a big data/analytics program, I'm monitoring a few dozen batch jobs (which are running on tens of thousands of CPUs in some data center), plus I have a youtube window in some corner for my music enjoyment.



kpedersen said:


> In fact, macOS probably wouldn't even boot on that machine. and yet it is very popular as a consumer desktop operating system.
> 
> Yes, it may seem obvious as to why (Apple wants money) ...


You don't understand Apple. They don't sell you a laptop (like the MacBook Pro I'm typing this on). They also don't sell you an OS (like the MacOS I'm typing this on). Nor a telephone or tablet (which I don't use) and the associated OS, nor a cloud service for serving music or storing data. What they sell you is the complete package of many (or all) of these things. If you could buy MacOS as a separate product, and run it on arbitrary hardware, then you'd be right to complain that it wouldn't even boot. Similarly, MacBooks are not intended to be run with other OSes (even though it is technically possible). If you stay in the "walled garden" of using the Apple ecosystem, then you will have a really good computing experience (at least I think so). If that walled garden is not what you want, or you need/want/desire stuff that's outside the walled garden, then you are not the appropriate customer for Apple's mindset.



Beastie7 said:


> You misunderstand. There's a difference between simply asking for donations or contributed work, and doing work *with the expectation *that people *should* give back or give you money for it. The FreeBSD Foundation does none of the latter. There is a clause in the BSD license that states those who use BSD licensed software to acknowledge the author of the original work involved. That is all someone needs.


The BSD license is not what holds back the usability of FreeBSD on the desktop. I think the reason is lack of investment. Building a seamless desktop/laptop system, from hardware support through user interface standards and a large stable of useful and usable applications takes an enormous amount of manpower. Hundreds or thousands or perhaps tenthousand people in engineering and engineering management. Microsoft and Apple have those people, and use the profits from selling it to pay for the staff. Linux has that to a smaller extent, the best example being RedHat (which has thousands of engineers working to make Linux better).

One thing we must not forget: The vast majority of engineering that happens for Linux is done by paid staff. People who work fulltime and get a paycheck to make Linux better. Many of them work for RedHat, Suse and so on. Some are paid by the various foundations and non-profits (like the Linux Foundation). But the bulk of them work for companies such as Intel, IBM, Oracle, ... who use Linux, and need to see it function. As an example, look at the Wikipedia page for "Linux Technology Center": Already in 2006 (15 years ago), IBM had 300 people working full-time on Linux development, and already by 2000 (about 8 or 9 years after Linux was born), it had invested a billion (not million) $ into Linux improvements. Amateurs, hobbyists and enthusiasts are a tiny or irrelevant part of the Linux ecosystem.

Obviously, the situation for FreeBSD is different. How many hundreds or thousands of people get a fulltime paycheck for working on the FreeBSD desktop environment? Duh, zero.



ShelLuser said:


> In my biased opinion open source in general isn't ready for the desktop.
> 
> Simply because it requires you - as a programmer - to think outside your own bubble and try to imagine what others might want from it.


Absolutely correct. Many engineering decisions in open source (even in commercially paid open source) are driven by engineers: I want to build this, I want to work on that. This is particularly true for efforts (such as the BSDs) that rely mostly on volunteers. At companies like Apple or Microsoft (or IBM or Oracle) the decision making is completely different: What do our users = customers want? How can we make our users happy? How can we get them to love our product so much that they will buy it again and again? This means a lot of decisions will be made by user interface researchers, by marketing people who tend to understand the users (and their personal and business needs and wants), by product managers. The individual engineer implements what they are ordered to implement.



> _Wait a second..._ Revenue and open source?


There is lots of revenue and profit in open source. Exhibit 1: Look at IBM buying RedHat for many billions. But you don't get revenue nor profit by giving the source code away and selling nothing else. RedHat sold support, and made a huge amount of money. IBM sells support, hardware, the whole computing ecosystem; giving a few million lines of Linux source code away per year doesn't change that business model.



> Personally I highly value 2 kinds of environments. I'll take FreeBSD over Windows as a server any day of the week, but having said that I also heavily prefer Windows 10 over FreeBSD (or any other X based desktop) as a client OS just as strongly.


Agree, except that I happen to prefer MacOS as a laptop OS. But I ran with Windows on my work laptop for about 15 years, and I wasn't terribly unhappy. And I can totally see that other people find Windows a good choice for their preferences, habits, and workflows.


----------



## Speedy (Jan 30, 2021)

> The problem is that today's DEs have a much higher workload, and that is for good reason.


What has DE to do with workload? My machine has also 16 GB of RAM, it runs virtual machines and web browsers. I do not need a bloated DE for this.


----------



## ralphbsz (Jan 30, 2021)

Sorry, the term "workload" was wrong. Today's DE have much more complexity, and they have to run many more things simultaneously.


----------



## hruodr (Jan 30, 2021)

ralphbsz said:


> Agree, except that I happen to prefer MacOS as a laptop OS. But I ran with Windows on my work laptop for about 15 years, and I wasn't terribly unhappy. And I can totally see that other people find Windows a good choice for their preferences, habits, and workflows.


I feel uncomfortable with any other OS than *BSD. I have no big requirements to an OS, I like
simple things and bare X11 is enough for me. I have the feeling that *BSD projects have 
not much life expectations, for different reasons. I hope, I am wrong.


----------



## a6h (Jan 30, 2021)

*DOS 6.22/OPTi-930*
I had an OPTi-930 sound without driver, and no internet. I tried to perfect my MASM skills to write a driver.
I failed. But I didn't dump DOS. There was no other choice though! Years later, I switched to windows 2000.

*FreeBSD 6.2!/WinModem*
I had a stupid modem, i.e. winmodem => No internet. I did the same, as I did with DOS: as(1), c(1).
I failed again. Solution: I bought an external US robotics 56K dial-up serial controller faxmodem.

*FreeBSD/Win7/Scarlett 18i6*
I used to have a hobby, playing instruments and record it with Scarlett 18i6 on Reaper/Windows.
The combination Scarlett 18i6 and Reaper wasn't FreeBSD friendly! But I didn't abandon FreeBSD.

*Conclusion*
Idealism => perfectionism => to give up => bad ethics!


----------



## hruodr (Jan 30, 2021)

Vigole, perhaps not to abandon xBSD is also idealism.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jan 30, 2021)

I think this thread has devolved or started into "Why isn't FreeBSD like..." (which isn't allowed here) and it seems more and more we're getting threads like this every week. I'm tired of it and find them to be a waste of bandwidth. If one can't make it work the way one likes then stating so doesn't matter or mean anything or have value. Asking how to make it work has value.


----------



## hruodr (Jan 30, 2021)

drhowarddrfine said:


> I think this thread has devolved or started into "Why isn't FreeBSD like...


Indeed that is my question: Why isn't FreeBSD like FreeBSD (before)?


----------



## kpedersen (Jan 30, 2021)

ralphbsz said:


> At companies like Apple or Microsoft (or IBM or Oracle) the decision making is completely different: What do our users = customers want?


Hmm, I haven't noticed this in commercial culture for years. Today these guys "tell" the customer what they want. For example no customers are asking for Microsoft to turn their eco-system into a locked down restrictive store model. Likewise no Apple user has wanted to require a developer license just to migrate a signed binary to another machine and be able to run it.

I feel the only way a user can get close to what they want these days is almost exclusively via open-source where the developers may be busy but they aren't crooks.

Edit: I think I recall us having a discussion about this before. If so, ignore my extra noise. To be fair I think drhowarddrfine is probably right in that this thread covers a lot of previous ground!


----------



## hruodr (Jan 30, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> Hmm, I haven't noticed this in commercial culture for years. Today these guys "tell" the customer what they want.


Not only these guys. Also politicians/states tell their customers what they want and consequently handle according to the public interest.


----------



## 2109cing (Jan 30, 2021)

Indeed it's an irony . I have never experienced proper FreeBSD desktop that i build for myself (i stuck at xinit , laugh at me) . When i as a newbie saw a potential FreeBSD have as a desktop , and this thread emerges on my sight . 

Maybe i was too late to notice FreeBSD . Working saps my time and attention to learn . Now that i lost my job because of pandemic , now i have all time in the world to learn for myself . Windows has been all my desktop experience . I was about to install linux , but my intuition told me i will be better if i come here . Idk why , heck , i even already made the MX-Linux live medium . I can simply give up FreeBSD , and go the easy way . But something allures me to stay here . I have no basis , just intuition , as i am just a week old chicklings in BSD-world .

Tbh , i was thankful that a 'first true global pandemic' strikes . I finally can enjoy myself and learn . How can i not notice this OS as alternative when i was busy from work . It's really an irony .

It's just a noob's noise don't mind me .


----------



## tedbell (Jan 30, 2021)

Been using FreeBSD as a desktop for 2 years now. I have no complaints or regrets. In fact, literally nothing has gone wrong that wasn't user error (mixing ports with pkgs for one).


----------



## Jose (Jan 30, 2021)

Maybe I can stay on Drhowarddrfine and Kpedersen's good side by reminiscing about the old days like the old fart that I am.


ralphbsz said:


> I used to run Xwindows on a 386-40 with 4MB of RAM. It ran very badly. Part of the problem was swapping; part of the problem was lack of FPU, which is needed for font rendering. I fixed that by buying a 387 floating point processor, but the machine was still barely usable due to lack of RAM. So I upgraded to a 486-25 with 16MB, and it worked acceptably...


I remember being outraged, outraged! Because VMS ported to C Windows NT 3.1 didn't run well on less than 8MB. Who's got that kind of RAM?
I'm going to be that guy and point out that the 386-40 was an AMD product and did have a math co. The fastest 386 you could get from Intel was the 386DX-33 which also had a math co. You probably had an Intel 386SX-25.


ralphbsz said:


> There was no web browser at the time. Matter-of-fact, there were darn few web sites; ftp was still using 100x more traffic than http on the internet. This must have been 1994. The idea of playing live video on a computer was laughable; playing short music clips (.wav files) was at the edge of what was doable...


Gopher FTW! Over a 2600 modem, natch. Do you remember the phone number for that BBS that had all the good drivers for NICs? It was a life saver when a driver floppy in your carefully curated collection went bad.


ralphbsz said:


> The BSD license is not what holds back the usability of FreeBSD on the desktop. I think the reason is lack of investment. Building a seamless desktop/laptop system, from hardware support through user interface standards and a large stable of useful and usable applications takes an enormous amount of manpower. Hundreds or thousands or perhaps tenthousand people in engineering and engineering management. Microsoft and Apple have those people...


Don't forget Google, with Android and Chromebook as exhibits A and B. It is possible to build a user friendly Linux device.


ralphbsz said:


> One thing we must not forget: The vast majority of engineering that happens for Linux is done by paid staff. People who work fulltime and get a paycheck to make Linux better. Many of them work for RedHat, Suse and so on. Some are paid by the various foundations and non-profits (like the Linux Foundation). But the bulk of them work for companies such as Intel, IBM, Oracle, ... who use Linux, and need to see it function. As an example, look at the Wikipedia page for "Linux Technology Center": Already in 2006 (15 years ago), IBM had 300 people working full-time on Linux development, and already by 2000 (about 8 or 9 years after Linux was born), it had invested a billion (not million) $ into Linux improvements. Amateurs, hobbyists and enthusiasts are a tiny or irrelevant part of the Linux ecosystem...


This can't be emphasized enough. The bedtime story that Open Source is driven by amateurs, volunteers, and students hasn't been true for at least two decades. Maybe it was never true.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jan 30, 2021)

When I worked for Silicon Graphics in the early 90s, I was told to figure out how to dial up so I could send messages back to the office rather than making phone calls. Better yet, see if I could get an internet connection--whatever that was. That same era, I was trying several times to install FreeBSD from floppies without success. In 2003, I tried the same floppies again and succeeded--probably cause I was wiser by then. Got a fresh copy of version 5.0--bought FreeBSD Unleashed--and became the giant in the industry I am today.


----------



## Argentum (Jan 30, 2021)

drhowarddrfine said:


> When I worked for Silicon Graphics in the early 90s, I was told to figure out how to dial up so I could send messages back to the office rather than making phone calls. Better yet, see if I could get an internet connection--whatever that was. That same era, I was trying several times to install FreeBSD from floppies without success. In 2003, I tried the same floppies again and succeeded--probably cause I was wiser by then. Got a fresh copy of version 5.0--bought FreeBSD Unleashed--and became the giant in the industry I am today.


Oh! I am  still using Silicon Graphics keyboard with FreeBSD. The best keyboard I have ever seen. Donated the Indigo to Computer museum but kept the keyboard, and it is still working. I am writing this on SGI keyboard...


----------



## kpedersen (Jan 30, 2021)

Jose said:


> Maybe I can stay on Drhowarddrfine and Kpedersen's good side by reminiscing about the old days


Haha. It is true, I really do enjoy the many snippets of history from many of you guys (ralphbsz also comes to mind)!

You had me beat, I had a 386SX-16 (up until an almost embarrassingly recent time, I think Windows XP was starting to become common). I could *just* about play Doom if the viewport was set to the size of a desktop icon. This might have been one of the slowest 32-bit processors Intel ever released.

Much of my "home" UNIX experience was from DesqView/X and DJGPP. One that I am still fairly fond of however


----------



## meine (Jan 30, 2021)

Triggered by the title of this tread that 'FreeBSD is not ready for all desktop users'...

IMHO most, if not all operating systems aren't ready for all users. In my perspective, my mom should be able to run a desktop computer and keep it up-to-date and running without any assistance. Type a memo, print it, send some emails and order some stuff home. Nothing more. For years.

To be honest, I don't think there is an OS that facilitates that to the full extent. Those days are over, unless you want to take a new, or better old fashioned perspective.

Today every OS and almost every piece of software needs updates and updated dependencies. All the time. Take a much used and needed piece of software: your browser -- Firefox updates at least once a week. And to be honest, as an end user I don't see any change or improvement at all. It is just replacing version 85.0_1,1 with 85.0_1,2, as if version numbers got a decimal comma these days to facilitate microscopic version management. Call it agile development or whatever, but what's the use for the end user? <silence>

MacOS, Linux, Windows are just the same. The boss-box is a W10 machine -- 'The' corporate platform here in NL -- and frequent updates just break usability repeatedly (major PITA is the change of user preferences, and that is (should be) not even on an OS-level) and even the IT helpdesk is puzzled how to solve it. Linux Mint is quite OK, but runnning updates always needs extra questions and passwords on installing extra *.lib-shit, and I don't know why it bothers me when I just ask the box to update -- period. Up til now, FreeBSD is the most stable OS with frequent updates I encountered since computers are online by default. And probably there is the root cause of misery: online is a synonym to 'continuous improvement'. And it isn't. Not per se.

Remember the days of my dad's Olivetti with DOS, Norton Commander and some text editor. It went on for ages, and no one ever used the word 'update'. My Mac Classic running System 6.0.7 for ages (and still). Software was good in it's basic form, and back in the 90-ies I can't remember serious flaws on software. The flaws came when internet connection replaced the 3,5" floppy disks.

'Continuous improvement', but to what? Text editors that could calculate, draw and send emails?

GNU/screen is mocked because there is 'no active development'. That's right! But is there a need for development if the code seems bug free and functional as intended? IMHO not.

I guess the best system for desktop users is an OS that facilitates development and new things, but also facilitates a 'stand still' robust and functional environment. Without bits falling apart, without hard drives getting cluttered with obscure runtime files that eat your M- or GB and slows down your machine. An OS that I would trust to install on my mom's laptop.

And FreeBSD would be my primary choice on that matter.


----------



## wolffnx (Jan 30, 2021)

Of course, FreeBSD its not ready for all desktop users
but its a tricky question because are many users and many levels of knowledge and skills

from the user "I dont wanna and dont know configuring and install anything" (this users give jobs to the It guys)

later,the regular user with basics skills that want to learn and try it

and the users that use every system since the 80 years
and set up a FreeBSD box with a desktop,configure everything in one hour or less

so,the original question of the post is useless to me

the title of the post can apply to any operating system


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jan 31, 2021)

What this all really means is it's not ready for the *home* user. And it's not meant to be.


----------



## ralphbsz (Jan 31, 2021)

We have now regressed to telling anecdotes from our ... well not youth, more mid-life ...

That's because the topics of "FreeBSD is not like ...", "FreeBSD is not what I need" and "FreeBSD is not suitable for the desktop" really don't have any interesting new thing to add.



Jose said:


> I'm going to be that guy and point out that the 386-40 was an AMD product and did have a math co.


No, the 386-40 that I used was the 32-bit data bus version, and did not have an FPU. And that was part of the problem: I had used it under DOS from about 1991 onwards (where lack of floating point didn't bother me), and by the time I needed floating point, the 386 market was getting thin. And finding a compatible 387 FPU was hard, because neither Intel nor AMD made the 387 in 40 MHz. I had to hunt for the Cyrix part, which was very rare. And as I mentioned, there was no internet. So I spend an afternoon driving around all of San Jose, Sunnyvale, Mountain View and Palo Alto (along El Camino), stopping at every computer store. Eventually, there was a person who barely spoke English in a corner store in southern Palo Alto, and when I asked for a Cyrix 387-40, he opened his desk drawer, and among the pencils there was a clearly used chip, no anti-static protection. He only wanted $20 or $40 for it (no tax, no receipt), so I took it, and it worked fine.



> Gopher FTW! Over a 2600 modem, natch. Do you remember the phone number for that BBS that had all the good drivers for NICs? It was a life saver when a driver floppy in your carefully curated collection went bad.


I had a 9600 baud modem at home (courtesy of my employer, who also supplied a bank of dial-in numbers). I didn't actually use IP over it (at that point, that was still SLIP, PPP was not really available, but configuring SLIP required root access on both sides, and at my employer that was impossible). Instead I used a userspace program that allowed remote login, copying files, and tunneling X sessions (at 9600 baud!). It might have been called "term" or something like that. The performance was awful. On the other hand, I had used IBM mainframes via 300 baud acoustic couplers, and VAXes and Unix machines via 1200 and 2400 baud modems (with VT100s at home), so 9600 baud was quite pleasant.



> Don't forget Google, with Android and Chromebook as exhibits A and B. It is possible to build a user friendly Linux device.


Yes, but you can't start with X windows and the standard DEs, which were written by hackers for hackers. Instead, you put a team of designers and market researchers on figuring out what users need and want. And then you have professional software engineers (instead of hackers) implement it. Same with the Mac: You can put a really good GUI on top of a FreeBSD-derived OS.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jan 31, 2021)

ralphbsz said:


> The BSD license is not what holds back the usability of FreeBSD on the desktop. I think the reason is lack of investment.



FreeBSD gets plenty of investment. The issue is domain specific expertise. Not many committers really understand (or are interested in understanding) graphics and design language in general. The lack of discussion on this topic in many conferences I've watched shows this.



ralphbsz said:


> Building a seamless desktop/laptop system, from hardware support through user interface standards and a large stable of useful and usable applications takes an enormous amount of manpower. Hundreds or thousands or perhaps tenthousand people in engineering and engineering management. Microsoft and Apple have those people, and use the profits from selling it to pay for the staff. Linux has that to a smaller extent, the best example being RedHat (which has thousands of engineers working to make Linux better).
> 
> One thing we must not forget: The vast majority of engineering that happens for Linux is done by paid staff. People who work fulltime and get a paycheck to make Linux better. Many of them work for RedHat, Suse and so on. Some are paid by the various foundations and non-profits (like the Linux Foundation). But the bulk of them work for companies such as Intel, IBM, Oracle, ... who use Linux, and need to see it function. As an example, look at the Wikipedia page for "Linux Technology Center": Already in 2006 (15 years ago), IBM had 300 people working full-time on Linux development, and already by 2000 (about 8 or 9 years after Linux was born), it had invested a billion (not million) $ into Linux improvements. Amateurs, hobbyists and enthusiasts are a tiny or irrelevant part of the Linux ecosystem.
> 
> Obviously, the situation for FreeBSD is different. How many hundreds or thousands of people get a fulltime paycheck for working on the FreeBSD desktop environment? Duh, zero.



You're preaching to the choir here. None of what I said states otherwise.


----------



## mzs47 (Jan 31, 2021)

meine drhowarddrfine wolffnx and to all others who hold similar views, I suggest the book of Don Norman -  ' The design of everyday things', I changed my view of usability after reading this. Also like one of you observed, a tool/tech should ideally be easy to use and maintain, ofc, I cannot expect 100% of users to use something, practically the Pareto principle should get satisfied(meaning most of the users can use it).

Btw, I am detailing how a expected thing - suspension to work(when your devices have supported drivers), whether we like it or not, the dynamics of the market will force comparison with other OSs and competition, any platform needs sizeable users to thrive(not survive), therefore, if this is wrong to expect then I don't think FreeBSD will ever gain any meaningful traction like other OS, cuz for the end user(average user) it won't matter whether it is Apache/BSD/GPL/EULA, as long it gets the job done.


----------



## a6h (Jan 31, 2021)

mzs47 said:


> [...] and to all others who hold similar views, I suggest the book of Don Norman -  ' The design of everyday things'


Why? I've read that. There's lots of science-talk in book, but I only found this: °C=(°F-21)*5/9. I think he's learnt that from the 2nd example of K&R 2nd.
No rigorous analysis, just random thoughts. Very psychological, very typical!


----------



## fernandel (Jan 31, 2021)

From PC DOS - OS/2 - Linux - FreeBSD from version 6.? - no servers just desktop computer - from StarOffice to LibreOffice, R and some Python for work, GIMP from first version and for me it works.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jan 31, 2021)

I'm sure that, if this was a forum about MAC trucks, people would be complaining about how inconvenient and hard to use it is for driving the kids to their soccer games and that if MAC wants their trucks to be more popular they need to install better radios, air conditioning, seats, and more. Cause Chevy and Ford and Honda have all those so MAC must have them, too!


----------



## Beastie7 (Jan 31, 2021)

drhowarddrfine said:


> I'm sure that, if this was a forum about MAC trucks, people would be complaining about how inconvenient and hard to use it is for driving the kids to their soccer games and that if MAC wants their trucks to be more popular they need to install better radios, air conditioning, seats, and more. Cause Chevy and Ford and Honda have all those so MAC must have them, too!



But the Mack Truck would still be a Mack Truck.. one would assume it's impractical to use a Mack Truck as a passenger car vehicle. Convenience and practicality aren't the same thing.


----------



## phalange (Jan 31, 2021)

I agree, the analogy is a little off. FreeBSD may not be at its core a desktop users' OS, but the final judgement is to the user. Using it as a desktop OS is not as absurd as using an 18-wheeler as a family car. Certainly there are some petty gripes that come up, but there are also legitimate suggestions for improvement and growth of the community.


----------



## Mjölnir (Jan 31, 2021)

I'm a happy FreeBSD-on-Laptop user, enjoying mainframe features on the size of a DIN-A4/(Letter) sheet


----------



## mzs47 (Jan 31, 2021)

fernandel said:


> From PC DOS - OS/2 - Linux - FreeBSD from version 6.? - no servers just desktop computer - from StarOffice to LibreOffice, R and some Python for work, GIMP from first version and for me it works.


Nice, try suspension and see whether it works.


----------



## mzs47 (Jan 31, 2021)

vigole said:


> Why? I've read that. There's lots of science-talk in book, but I only found this: °C=(°F-21)*5/9. I think he's learnt that from the 2nd example of K&R 2nd.
> No rigorous analysis, just random thoughts. Very psychological, very typical!


I did not understand your criticism, care to elaborate?


----------



## Mjölnir (Feb 1, 2021)

mzs47 said:


> Nice, try suspension and see whether it works.


Repeating from above:
OpenSource OS's rely on hardware & BIOS to conform to the published standards.
Unfortunately, some standards are written ambiguously.  Note the frequency of version & revision updates to get an estimate.  Naturally, this is a source of failures.
To run reliably on non-conformant HW & BIOS implementations, they need so called _quirks_ to cope with the incomtabilities.
1000's of professional software engineers are paid to write those _quirks_ for other OSs, in contrast only a few volunteers (many of them beeing professionals, too) are writing _quirks_ for FreeBSD, plus some paid ones at companies that leverage FreeBSD, e.g. Netflix or NetApp.
Many hardware is conformant, but most BIOS implementations are not.  In particular, the vast majority of ACPI implementations do not conform to the published standards.  On modern hardware, power management is done via ACPI.  It's ancestor APM was even much more of a disaster.

You need compatible hardware to run FreeBSD
You need a standard-conformant BIOS to run FreeBSD
You need a standard-conformant ACPI to run FreeBSD
2nd, You might have a misconception of what FreeBSD is?

My laptop, that seems to be more compatible than average, can suspend/resume & hibernate without any problems. In fact, FreeBSD makes a very good base for a desktop system; IMHO far better than any other open source OS that I'm aware of.  YMMV...


----------



## mzs47 (Feb 1, 2021)

Mjölnir said:


> Repeating from above:



I will still wait for the user's response, anyways, to your comment - In short, it is not ready for the desktops and only for few laptops(those that have the privilege of getting supported) and mostly for servers(these don't need this feature).

It is a different topic why FreeBSD does not have what Linux kernel has today, what we have today is not overnight.
Please do keep in mind that Linux's  origins and much of the years were not this good, but after getting adopted by the users(and later orgs), it rose in prominence. This is much like how Toyota started in budget market and later entered the premium market.

Further, if there are no users asking, then we won't see participation for FreeBSD like below, again the below changes started after a major user asked the vendor.
I think somewhere this downward spiral started and is hard to break at this stage(not impossible).






						Intel Has Been Recently Ramping Up Their FreeBSD Support - Phoronix
					






					www.phoronix.com


----------



## hruodr (Feb 1, 2021)

mzs47 said:


> I will still wait for the user's response, anyways


I do not know a Linux distribution that satisfies me, that looks like classical unix/BSD + X11. And that is what I expect for *my* desktop. Of course you can configure a Linux distribution like that, but configuring is
work, and keeping the configuration is also work.

Why this whole discussion that from time to time arises again and again?

Windows is good, MaOS is good, Linux is good, *BSD is good. They are different and good for different people.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Feb 1, 2021)

And round and round we go. 
Where this stops
Nobody knows.

I think I'll find a Linux forum and point out how Linux isn't like Windows and FreeBSD


----------



## wolffnx (Feb 1, 2021)

drhowarddrfine said:


> And round and round we go.
> Where this stops
> Nobody knows.
> 
> I think I'll find a Linux forum and point out how Linux isn't like Windows and FreeBSD



 good idea, I pay for see that answers


----------



## mzs47 (Feb 3, 2021)

OSs are all unique in their own way, but do remember that an OS has some common functions. Maybe I was not clear enough and so people are conflating with the statements like "how xyz not like __".  

If FreeBSD community is ok with not getting users and remaining a minority, so be it. But the picture I get from many reviews, projects was quite opposite.
Btw, some of you had very reasonable points, thanks.


----------



## Mjölnir (Feb 3, 2021)

mzs47 said:


> [...] Btw, some of you had very reasonable points, thanks.


Feel free to send in patches to increase the OS's kindlyness to users. E.g. 
Some (many?) manpages are written in a language that is too complicated for non-techies.  OTOH, they should provide precise & accurate information, so it's a very difficult task to fulfill two contrary requirements.   The goal to use an easy language should of course not apply to sections 2, 3 & 9 of the manpages, and to a lesser extent to sections 4, 5 & 7.
Error messages.  A recent example: that error message in ext2fs(5): `"WARNING: Can not mount %s due to unsupported mount flags (%s)", device, "needs_recovery"`
It would be much nicer to write `"WARNING: Can not mount %s.\nREASON: The filesystem on %s was not cleanly unmounted.\nSOLUTION: Please run: 'fsck %s' on the host owning that filesystem.", device, device, device` instead (by default, ext2fs(5) mounts read-only, thus the fsck(8) shouldn't be done on FreeBSD).
The above topics do apply to many other UNIX-like OSs, too.


----------



## Beastie7 (Feb 3, 2021)

Mjölnir said:


> Some (many?) manpages are written in a language that is too complicated for non-techies. OTOH, they should provide precise & accurate information, so it's a very difficult task to fulfill two contrary requirements. The goal to use an easy language should of course not apply to sections 2, 3 & 9 of the manpages, and to a lesser extent to sections 4, 5 & 7.



This. I agree. It would be nice if manpages had a simple column or row menu (AIX SMIT-like?) for quickly navigating between each sections too. 'Cause I'm lazy.


----------



## gschadow (Feb 4, 2021)

Sadly FreeBSD doesn't even seem to be for servers any more.









						FreeBSD was once "the power to server" but in an AWS world we have fallen way, waaay behind and there seems no interest to fix it!
					

I have been with FreeBSD since 386BSD 0.0new and always was going for FreeBSD as my first choice for every server I built. Device drivers being a little later than for Linux was OK. Somehow I muddled through.  But now I feel like a stomach punch.  The future of serving is AWS and the like...




					forums.freebsd.org
				




I might be spamming a little bit, but there is a consistent disregard of this urgent issue on this forum and I haves seen nobody respond to recent bugzilla submissions I made with entire new feature patches (granted not about the performance). But my point is that somehow FreeBSD seems severely ill, neglected or something. What is going on?


----------



## Beastie7 (Feb 4, 2021)

Your experience with a proprietary cloud platform has nothing to do with the merits of FreeBSD as a server. Your criticism is misplaced. Please savor us the trolling.


----------



## Jose (Feb 4, 2021)

Beastie7 said:


> Your experience with a proprietary cloud platform has nothing to do with the merits of FreeBSD as a server. Your criticism is misplaced. Please savor us the trolling.


Maybe we'll get lucky and he'll find some more threads to necro to really drive his point home.

Yes folks, that's sarcasm.


----------



## shkhln (Feb 4, 2021)

gschadow said:


> I haves seen nobody respond to recent bugzilla submissions I made with entire new feature patches (granted not about the performance).


You mean this one? Nobody likes kernel patches coming seemingly out of nowhere. You should cc a few committers working on that code or ask for opinions on the corresponding mailing list. Make sure to learn how to use Phabricator.

Also, your style is kind of difficult to read. All this text would greatly benefit from being 2/3 shorter.


----------



## mzs47 (Feb 4, 2021)

gschadow said:


> Sadly FreeBSD doesn't even seem to be for servers any more.



This falls in AWS (and DigitalOcean's or ___ "cloud" provider's) bucket, something that the FreeBSD project cannot control.
I have used FreeBSD on AWS and DO, and _few_ features are not on par with GNU/Linux, like some features are not available, but it ran well.

So you will have to question AWS evangelist who blogged how FreeBSD is "well supported" since long on AWS and much before Azure announced it.
I did this(links below) and questioned the lack of OpenDistro that AWS is sponsoring.
Please do your bit, especially as a paying user - Raise a support request from within AWS account, that will have much impact and as more paying user ask they need to respond.


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1186220914540548096_View: https://twitter.com/mzs114/status/1186220914540548096_









						Packages for FreeBSD. · Issue #30 · opendistro-for-elasticsearch/opendistro-build
					

FreeBSD has stock ELK 6, OpenDistro would be a good alternative for it, FreeBSD has OpenJDK 8 and 11 in the stock repositories so getting OpenDistro run on it should be straight forward. I can help...




					github.com


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Feb 4, 2021)

gschadow said:


> But my point is that somehow FreeBSD seems severely ill, neglected or something. What is going on?


Oh, so, FreeBSD is dying again?


----------



## BostonBSD (Feb 4, 2021)

The group answer is not necessarily the correct answer {ad populum fallacy}.
The most correct answer is that of fewest assumptions {the group answer is that of fewest rejections}.
The correct answer, for an individual, is whatever they choose for themself.

Some people like automatics, some people like manual transmissions.
I don't think FreeBSD will ever be ready for all desktop users, nor do I think it should be.


----------



## diortemew (Feb 8, 2021)

richardtoohey2 said:


> Thanks - but not sure after reading that thread if it was Nvidia or X or FreeBSD or a combination of all of them that made it a bit of a mission!
> 
> I vaguely remember installing Mint on machine with Nvidia and needing a bit of help from a famous search engine to get it going.
> 
> Anyway, think I'm dragging this off-topic! As with most things, YMMV.


sorry for the delay, had a death in the family, haven't been on here in a while. but yes, I actually figured that issue out, it was the Dell AIO. frustrated with the system constantly giving me gui issues, even though xfce had a day or two where it worked fine, I tried elementary then ubuntu, both of which would not draw gui correctly.

after talking with an expert (family friend), he said to me "oh, it must have an intel hd xxxx". going back to my cli, yes, he was correct. something about it gets too hot with specific os's and drivers, and he told me to install Windows and it'll give no issues. He was correct. So I was telling my mom about his advice, confused obviously, and she says, "wait, can I have it? if so, can you get this ugly beast out of my living room?" I had given her my old gaming system when I upgraded as she needed a pc for keeping books for the farm. So I went from a Dell AIO giving me nothing but issues to putting FreeBSD on my laptop (non-gui) and using my Windows+Docker+Ubuntu WSL2 as a solo system, then I took Fedora and put it on the old gaming hardware. Now I have a FreeBSD server, Fedora Workstation, and this PC, but I only use this more powerful desktop to control all three via vscode.

The past couple of days have been busy ones and I am just getting back into the saddle. Needless to say, that old Dell gave me a headache, but before I installed FreeBSD for real, I installed it from memory with xfce. It flew like nobody's business. I still back the claim that nvidia is causing issues, note that on my Dell laptop, an AMD system, xfce and gnome worked perfectly. Gnome was a headache on the nvidia system, but only with the window drawing for the terminal and file manager. everything else seemed okay, but it was still off-putting.

I am learning more and more every day. Eventually, I will have some expert knowledge on FreeBSD, but until then, I'll just instigate here and there for fun (no, seriously kidding!). Yeah, those nvidia drivers, i don't understand them, they work fine on Fedora, but not on FreeBSD. meh.

It doesn't matter at this point. I now have the perfect setup for development training and operations. Is there nothing vscode can't do? Honestly, how did MS do it? What a wonderful piece of software.


----------



## mr8ash (Jul 1, 2021)

I run freebsd on an 8 yrs old laptop with 12G ram and a dual gpu system built in aka optimus card. It runs gnome, xfce, lxde, kde, plasma5, openbox, i3. No issues. Suspend works. 3k video on mpv works with hardware rendering. Other basic stuffs works. Its been on freebsd since 2017. I am no programmer, just average user who does not mind learning the hard ways. I learn and configure xwindows by reading from post onlines. Through trials and errors. Its fun and frustrating too.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Jul 1, 2021)

Not all desktop users will ever be ready for FreeBSD.

I'm surrounded by computer illiterates.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 1, 2021)

diortemew said:


> It doesn't matter at this point. I now have the perfect setup for development training and operations. Is there nothing vscode can't do? Honestly, how did MS do it? What a wonderful piece of software.


Thats an easy one. They didn't do it. It is really just a modified version of the open-source editor called Atom.

https://atom.io/

You can see the similarities. VSCode also still references "Atom" in many places.


----------



## mer (Jul 1, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> You can see the similarities. VSCode also still references "Atom" in many places.


Funny, looking at the vscode webpage, many of the "features" are things that have been available in Emacs for a while.  I see we have a port for vscode, but nothing for Atom editor.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Jul 3, 2021)

gschadow said:


> Sadly FreeBSD doesn't even seem to be for servers any more.


It serves me very well or I would not be using it as a Desktop Oriented Operating System on 7 laptops


gschadow said:


> But my point is that somehow FreeBSD seems severely ill, neglected or something. What is going on?


Nothing.

You're a stranger in a strange land and wondering why the yellow brick road doesn't remind you of the way it looked outside Penguin Park Place back in TuxTown. 

Just close your eyes, no peeking, click your heels together 3 times and say "This is my new Home". Now you can open them.




That was just a little Shock Therapy.

And probably why I made an account at the Kali forums to submit some wallpapers for review and never recieved my confirmation letter so I can post to offer them. The only posting I would be doing there since I don't ask questions.

So I'll put them up for Demonica, since that is one of her forms, withdraw my good will offer and honor the Goddess of Death, Time and Doomsday by giving them away to those who long for the embrace of the Dark Mother.

That poor misguided guy who freaked out about me being a fan of Kali will go apoplectic.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 3, 2021)

To the opening post:



mzs47 said:


> … suspend to memory(RAM) not working on a Ivy Bridge desktop with HD graphics(~ 8 years old now). … suspend to RAM is really required in this case …



– and:



mzs47 said:


> … some mixer related message when I try to suspend. …



mzs47 please see <https://forums.FreeBSD.org/threads/80412/post-519408> and <https://forums.FreeBSD.org/threads/80412/post-520160> under *forcing off the computer – endlessly waiting for sound application to exit at sleep/suspend time*


----------



## sidetone (Jul 3, 2021)

I wish I were able to bring the amount of improvements that I used to bring. With some obvious problems fixed, it's a bit more difficult to make improvements.

Usually, when I leave something and come back, things get easier. On the other hand, it may take me learning C: debugging and/or programming. Maybe taking up a port, or learning how to make everything more ready for commits, because ports that don't have maintainers can get ignored.

I used to point things out, and they were like, oh!

I have simply wrote documentaion on the forums or another wiki. Perhaps my mind is tired right now. I need to learn how to and get comfortable with directly adding documentation differences to FreeBSD docs, especially that they made it less complicated.

The way the handbook used to be was, it was numbered from the start, so if someone made an update before another person did, the whole diff had to be changed. Now, it's a lot better, because they're numbered from the beginning of each chapter. I believe that the dependencies for uploading suggestions were fixed. Markup was simplified, but that isn't an issue to me. Perhaps it was also made made simpler in other ways.


----------



## dj015 (Jul 5, 2021)

Suspend/resume and power management have always been difficult to get right, requiring support from every driver and every piece of hardware. Windows NT had nothing. Windows 9x barely supported even the simple APM standard. Even on modern Windows it can be somewhat spotty. NVidia cards can't always do it, IIRC they had a list of supported motherboards. Suspend/resume in Linux works on my laptop, somewhat: about ~10% of the time when I get a blank screen on resume and have to power cycle.

One of the best things Microsoft did to improve suspend/resume recently, perhaps unintentionally, is to make the "Shut down" option in Windows actually suspend instead of shutting down. That must have put enormous pressure on hardware manufacturers to get suspend/resume working perfectly, as failure to suspend/resume is immediately obvious to users no matter how they turn off, making it a top priority. I wonder how much this improved suspend/resume support in open-source operating systems though.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jul 5, 2021)

I don't even know where to start with that. I haven't found much documentation or recent work on that part of base. The lack of ACPI/GUI integration frustrates me too.


----------



## Jose (Jul 5, 2021)

Heck my work Macbook doesn't "resume" properly sometimes. I blame the oodles of corporate crapware on it, but I have noticed that having to give the Vulcan pinch to my personal and family Macbooks has become more common.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jul 5, 2021)

One of my keys died on my rMBP keyboard, did all of that above, still no cigar. I can replace the keyboard on my T480 anytime; I can't do that on a rMBP from 2015.

Thanks Apple. It just works, huh?


----------



## ralphbsz (Jul 6, 2021)

It is perfectly possible to replace keyboards on MBPs. It's not easy, because you have to dig through everything (batteries, disks, fans, motherboard ...) until you get there. I've replaced the trackpad on a 2008 MBP, and most of the guts on a 2014 MB Air.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jul 6, 2021)

You must enjoy pain.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 6, 2021)

I reached a tipping point. Looking forward to receiving a new HP notebook that FreeBSD can not boot. I can not make a business case for FreeBSD-compatible hardware. 

I don't enjoy pain. Imagine … a world of desktop computing where everyday things become more user-friendly with Windows 10. 

I do plan to continue use of FreeBSD 14.0-CURRENT – in VirtualBox.


----------



## diizzy (Jul 6, 2021)

In my experience Hyper-V works better than VirtualBox on Windows so you might want to check it out.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 6, 2021)

diizzy said:


> In my experience Hyper-V works better …



Thanks, I do already have some installations of FreeBSD in Hyper-V but they were not accessed locally. They were through a combination of Citrix + RDP, which (for me) isn't great; if I'm not careful, keyboard shortcuts have annoying unwanted consequences. There, I switched from Hyper-V to VirtualBox. 

I'll retry Hyper-V when I get the new computer.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 6, 2021)

grahamperrin said:


> I don't enjoy pain. Imagine … a world of desktop computing where everyday things become more user-friendly with Windows 10.


Distracting "popups" everywhere! Visual overload and for absolutely no real gain. Looking forward to it 

Btw, I rarely suggest proprietary alternatives but since you are stuck with Windows anyway, I do recommend VMware. It has such a handy vmware-kvm tool that emulates a KVM switch.

You can basically tap the "pause" key (by default) and instantly toggle between Windows and the VM. If you put a shortcut for it in your shell:startup folder, you honestly won't even remember you are running windows (until you press "pause").

https://kb.vmware.com/s/article/2057914

Hyper-V is actually pretty good too, however it is not really meant for desktop usage. No USB passthrough and no good virtualized graphics drivers for native resolution. Instead it is *obsessed* with using RDP to solve all of these problems which is a kludge. You will be better off with Windows 7 and VirtualPC 2004.


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Jul 6, 2021)

Beastie7 said:


> You must enjoy pain.


Fortunate for all of us which do not enjoy pain but still want to get that stuff fixed there are third party repair shops around. Of course these are not endorsed or authorized by Apple Inc., but still most of them are doing a great job and repairing stuff where Apple just tells you "replace the logic board" and wants to sell you a new machine for a faction of that price. Some of them even do offer nationwide mail-in service.

So if you want to extend the lifetime of your machine instead getting a new one, these are a viable option and way to go.

Or if you are feeling more adventurous, you can watch the myriads of repair videos done by Louis Rossmann on Youtube, where he also has a couple of replacing keyboards, and try to do that by yourself. But be aware that first you really need to spend some money on special repair tools most likely. There are myriads of self repair videos featuring Apple products being available on Youtube. Problem normally is to get schematics and spare parts.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 6, 2021)

Beastie7 said:


> You must enjoy pain.


He's a real computer guy.

Decades ago, the manager of a radio station I worked at wanted to have a printer for his Radio Shack TRS-80. I don't recall but there was no such thing at the time. I wrote some assembly, burned an EEPROM by hand, breadboarded with wire a hardware interface and dug into the internals of the computer to hardwire it in to make it all work.

Even today I can't believe I did that.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jul 6, 2021)

hardworkingnewbie said:


> Fortunate for all of us which do not enjoy pain but still want to get that stuff fixed there are third party repair shops around.



They're still sealed, and non-user serviceable. That's my whole complaint. It's like taking onions out of a melted cheeseburger before eating it. Ain't nobody got time for that nonsense.


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Jul 6, 2021)

Beastie7 said:


> They're still sealed, and non-user serviceable. That's my whole complaint. It's like taking onions out of a melted cheeseburger before eating it. Ain't nobody got time for that nonsense.


Well nobody forces you to buy Apple products, right? And if you should buy Apple most exactly do know which mess you are getting yourself into. 

I do agree this stuff should be serviceable, but well - it's not, like a whole myriad of other todays' products as well.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 6, 2021)

hardworkingnewbie said:


> Well nobody forces you to buy Apple products, right? And if you should buy Apple most exactly do know which mess you are getting yourself into.
> 
> I do agree this stuff should be serviceable, but well - it's not, like a whole myriad of other todays' products as well.



There should be an extra tax added to un-reparable goods like this. That money should then go to all these environmental charities that us little peasants are being convinced to give our little bits of money to.

Each time my council or government tells me that it is my usage of a kettle or a slightly older car that is causing environmental harm rather than all of this landfill crap that Apple churns out, I declare a little bit less on my tax return each year.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jul 6, 2021)

hardworkingnewbie said:


> Well nobody forces you to buy Apple products, right? And if you should buy Apple most exactly do know which mess you are getting yourself into.



macOS is literally the only other option of two major platforms for production apps. So I'm bound to the lesser of two evils. Get out of here with that rubbish. I shouldn't have to wrestle through an ass-ton of adhesive just to replace my keyboard. My T480 is a breeze with it's lego-like design.


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Jul 6, 2021)

This depends of course also on which production apps you do need for your daily work, so your mileage might vary for other people.

For most people nowadays a Chromebook with the right webapps is enough to do their daily work. Of course then again you've got to deal with the cloud and all of its implications...


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 6, 2021)

Windows 10



kpedersen said:


> Distracting "popups" everywhere! Visual overload and for absolutely no real gain. Looking forward to it



On the plus side: 

it boots, on the given hardware; FreeBSD can not
I can easily sleep and wake a Windows 10 computer; with FreeBSD it's a rigmarole
I can hibernate a Windows 10 computer; with FreeBSD I can not
there are fairly good GUIs for networking, including Bluetooth
fewer problems with networking
fewer problems with networking
fewer problems with networking
… and so on.
I'd prefer a Mac, but (as with FreeBSD-compatible computers) I can not make a business case for it.

Virtualisation



kpedersen said:


> Hyper-V is actually pretty good too, however it is not really meant for desktop usage. No USB passthrough



Thanks, that's probably a show-stopper for me.



kpedersen said:


> and no good virtualized graphics drivers for native resolution. Instead it is *obsessed* with using RDP to solve all of these problems which is a kludge.



Windows 7



kpedersen said:


> You will be better off with Windows 7 and …



No. I was involved in a project to cease use of unsupported versions of Windows.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 6, 2021)

grahamperrin said:


> it boots, on the given hardware; FreeBSD can not


Heh, not on my machines it can't, it throws a fit at the slightly older GMA chip. FreeBSD really does have much wider hardware support.



grahamperrin said:


> I'd prefer a Mac, but (as with FreeBSD-compatible computers) I can not make a business case for it.


ThinkPads are very well supported by FreeBSD. Especially those a year or so old. They are also very easy to make a business case for because to the casual user, they are rarely seen as "desirable" unlike Apple's nonsense.

Just chuck this (7th Gen) into the next IT procurement request 

https://www.uk.insight.com/en-gb/productinfo/laptops-and-notebooks/0009225023



grahamperrin said:


> No. I was involved in a project to cease use of unsupported versions of Windows.


I tend to believe that Microsoft is unfit to support any version of Windows. So take your pick!


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 6, 2021)

One needs to remember that manufacturing, distribution, marketing and packaging all come into play when building a product. While many of us would like our products to be serviceable, doing so might make such products larger, more expensive, and not what we are looking for. An example would be an iPad. Would it be larger or heavier to allow serviceability? Does it also affect reliability cause you now have, say, screws that can come loose or parts that, instead of being soldered down, are now removable?


----------



## mer (Jul 6, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> I tend to believe that Microsoft is unfit to support any version of Windows. So take your pick!


This is funny.  
A little thing MS could do is better notification when something goes EOL.  Win 10, the update process is OK since it mostly works, but I have a laptop that I installed Win10 on (because Win7 went EOL) and the specific build went EOL.  Just got "feature update not ready for this device yet", never went to "here's new feature", the build (1841 I think) went EOL but no message ever about "This build is EOL" just red "we can't update this device".  Took a weekend of scrambling to figure out the standalone win 10 updater to put latest on the thing.

All they needed to do in the update thing was:
We can't update your device because your build/blah is End Of Life.
Here is a link to the standalone installer and information on how to update it to the latest.


----------



## Alain De Vos (Jul 6, 2021)

Windows, or Press Start to Stop.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 6, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> … They are also very easy to make a business case for …



It's not so easy. Windows 10 is a requirement, and the hardware that's normally given (most often: HP ProBook 400 440 G7) runs Windows 10 very well.

I can't make a case for alternative hardware based on a personal preference for something other than Windows.


----------



## mer (Jul 6, 2021)

This thread reminds me of one of the "Unix Truths":

Unix is very user friendly, it's just picky about it's friends.


----------



## phalange (Jul 7, 2021)

drhowarddrfine said:


> One needs to remember that manufacturing, distribution, marketing and packaging all come into play when building a product. While many of us would like our products to be serviceable, doing so might make such products larger, more expensive, and not what we are looking for. An example would be an iPad. Would it be larger or heavier to allow serviceability? Does it also affect reliability cause you now have, say, screws that can come loose or parts that, instead of being soldered down, are now removable?


One needs to remember that forced obsolescence is massively profitable. iPads aren't non-serviceable to make them weigh less. That's why Apple goes to court to stop people repairing their stuff.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 7, 2021)

grahamperrin said:


> Windows 10 is a requirement


I am going to go ahead and suggest that Windows 10 is never a requirement. Yes, it may be enforced by your specific department. Yes, the decision makers can be incompetent idiots and force people to use it due to their lack of knowledge of alternatives. However when you look into it, Windows 10 is never a requirement any more than fluffy wallpaper or a toilet brush with a little bear face on the handle.

Disappointingly I understand the above statement means very little when you are stuck with it. I have a couple of laptops provided by my employers which are still in the box. I just take my good ol' ratty X240 ThinkPad into work instead until their laptops are supported. The trick is to not be attracted to new shiny equipment.

If you need to test on Windows, then VMs are very useful. Especially if you work in the tech sector. Much work is using VMs anyway so running a VM on FreeBSD vs running a VM on Windows make so very little difference.


----------



## TerabyteForever (Jul 7, 2021)

If you didn't make it, it is not a perfect thing for you. This rule is valid everywhere in life. If a thing is there, it is because of the audience behind it. That thing (which is FreeBSD in this case) fits the requests of the audience then, so they use it. 

It is all about expectations. For example; I wanted a stable operating system for daily, and wanted to try something new -by getting out of my comfort zone-, so installed FreeBSD. Yes, dealing with packages or configs may be a little bit boring, but I love to do so.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 7, 2021)

phalange  I worked for manufacturing companies half my life and not once was the subject of "forced obsolescence" ever brought up or considered.


----------



## Alain De Vos (Jul 7, 2021)

Your gsm fullfills forced obsolescence as any Windows O.S. installation.
Some freebsd versions are EOL.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 7, 2021)

Alain De Vos 

Not the same thing. It's one thing when things need to be upgraded due to technology changes. It's another to intentionally design obsolescence into the product.


----------



## Alain De Vos (Jul 7, 2021)

True that.


----------



## phalange (Jul 7, 2021)

drhowarddrfine said:


> phalange  I worked for manufacturing companies half my life and not once was the subject of "forced obsolescence" ever brought up or considered.



Are you seriously arguing that companies like Apple and Google don't actively implement policies that result in hardware turnover? That's not tenable.

Moreover Tim Cook doesn't need to outline obsolencense strategies to every rank-and-file employee. And yet the actions of the organization lead to it. What do you think the right-to-repair fight is about? Clearly maintaining iPhones forever is financially problematic for Apple.


----------



## Alain De Vos (Jul 7, 2021)

Android has special updates to make your phone slower over time ...


----------



## mer (Jul 7, 2021)

Alain De Vos said:


> Android has special updates to make your phone slower over time ...


The trick is use a phone old enough that they won't push updates to.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 7, 2021)

phalange said:


> Are you seriously arguing that companies like Apple and Google don't actively implement policies that result in hardware turnover?


I guarantee that they do not. If you have proof otherwise, please provide it.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 7, 2021)

Alain De Vos said:


> Android has special updates to make your phone slower over time ...



It also has updates that lets these same companies watch you without your knowing it, continuously, in order to steal money from your bank account.


----------



## phalange (Jul 7, 2021)

drhowarddrfine said:


> I guarantee that they do not. If you have proof otherwise, please provide it.



It's been studied and documented for 100 years. It's objective reality.






						Planned obsolescence - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				





I've heard the anti-consumer pro-business rhetoric that disclaims planned obsolescence ad nauseam. Very predictable. You don't have the cards to "guarantee" anything and I'm quite sure you know it.









						Planned Obsolescence: Apple Is Not The Only Culprit
					

Apple just got smacked with a class action lawsuit after the tech giant admitted it slowed down older iPhones. This act is also known as planned obsolescence.




					www.forbes.com
				












						Apple investigated by France for 'planned obsolescence'
					

Prosecutors will look into claims of "planned obsolescence" in iPhones, which is illegal in France.



					www.bbc.com
				












						Apple to pay $3.4M in Chile to settle planned obsolescence lawsuit | AppleInsider
					

Apple has agreed to pay $3.4 million to settle a lawsuit in Chile that accused the company of iPhone planned obsolescence.




					appleinsider.com
				












						Apple and Samsung fined for deliberately slowing down phones
					

Italian investigation found software updates ‘significantly reduced performance’, hastening new purchases




					www.theguardian.com
				












						Planned obsolescence: the outrage of our electronic waste mountain
					

Unrepairable phones and laptops are a serious problem in our throwaway society. But the pushback is building - and the coronavirus crisis has added more pressure for change




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Alain De Vos (Jul 7, 2021)

You don't need to be Einstein to know if let's say the lifespan/use of a smartphone would be the same as for instance a car, 20 years.
The sales numbers and revenues of the smartphone company's would decrease.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jul 7, 2021)

You can only support old hardware for so long. As technology improves there's a lot of technical baggage involved with supporting old hardware. I can still install macOS Catalina on a 2008 Macbook, but the software is way ahead of the hardware used to provide the experience. It's just a pain in the ass to get installed; that's the gap Apple fills. FreeBSD is a horizontal platform anyway so you guys are fighting in the air for no reason.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jul 7, 2021)

Oh, and Apple has a ginormous wallet too; which is ripe for "lawsuits". Thank Steve Jobs.


----------



## Alain De Vos (Jul 7, 2021)

Do not forget company's have a responsibility to make profit in order to make the shareholders very happy.


			https://trekmovie.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/armin-ds9-publicty.jpg


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 7, 2021)

phalange Look closely and you will see none of those are "planned" as in "we'll intentionally build this *new* product so it will fall apart in a certain period of time." 
At least that's what I'm talking about. I have a feeling it's not what you are talking about.


----------



## cynwulf (Jul 7, 2021)

Windows 8/10 came about after Windows 7 made love with Powerpoint behind the recycle bins...

People lie to themselves and pretend it's a fantastic GUI, because the GUI is all that matters to most, whereas in fact it's an utter mess and mishmash of the Windows Vista/7 style and Powerpoint style UI elements. Linux was once critiqued as "fragmented" - Windows 10 is an utter mess of poor UI implementation that makes the gnome project actually look sane.

"Ready for [the|your] desktop" or not - FreeBSD is a piece of art by comparison.

I've also recently discovered that good quality beer is "not yet ready" for "all" beer drinkers - most unfortunate... I suppose I'll have to drink it myself.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 8, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> I am going to go ahead and suggest that Windows 10 is never a requirement.



I frequently manage computer objects in Active Directory; use Quick Assist; and so on. Windows 10 is a requirement.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 8, 2021)

grahamperrin said:


> I frequently manage computer objects in Active Directory; use Quick Assist; and so on. Windows 10 is a requirement.


I am fairly sure Active Directory can be managed via Windows NT 4.x 

Quick Assist is Microsoft's self deprecated version of Windows Remote Assistant right? This is one of those choices where because you decide to use it, that is the only reason why your users must then also use Windows 10. If you keep with Windows Remote Assistant, your users will thank you for it. What do you use for the macOS guys?


----------



## Alain De Vos (Jul 8, 2021)

To use feature C of Microsoft you must have feature B of Microsoft. To have feature B of Microsoft you must have feature A of Microsoft.
Feature A of Microsoft works incompatible with opensource specification and works best with feature C of Microsoft.
This is a simple trick of Vendor Lock-in.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 8, 2021)

Alain De Vos said:


> This is a simple trick of Vendor Lock-in.


Yes this is so true. A recent project I have seen it with was HoloLens 1. The API requires some UWP code which requires C++/cx extensions which requires Microsoft's shite compiler toolchain.

We did not engage with that mess and now Microsoft for HoloLens 2 has dropped UWP, dropped C++/cx. Our foresight now gives us a lot of sway with the client going forward.

Just say "no" to scummy businesses kids.

(To Microsoft's defence; *all* VR related companies seem to be absolute dirt).


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 8, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> … Quick Assist is Microsoft's self deprecated …



No. It's integral to Windows 10. 

Quick Assist is much more user-friendly than what was integral to Windows 7. 

Solve PC problems over a remote connection



kpedersen said:


> … What do you use for the macOS guys?



Microsoft Teams on Windows 10.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 8, 2021)

grahamperrin said:


> No. It's integral to Windows 10.


By integral to Windows 10, you really just mean that Microsoft doesn't provide a binary for any other platform but Windows 10 right?



grahamperrin said:


> Microsoft Teams on Windows 10.


Sounds like you really could make a business case! Start along the lines of

_"To ensure a consistent workflow for our users, rather than utilising different software per platform, it could be a useful innovation to standardise on Microsoft Teams for all platforms when providing remote support"._

... and now, you can use the MS Teams web client on Windows, macOS, Linux and FreeBSD. 
IT support uses that where I work. It is actually fairly satisfactory.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 8, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> By integral to Windows 10, you really just mean that Microsoft doesn't provide a binary for any other platform but Windows 10 right?



Wrong. 



kpedersen said:


> _"To ensure a consistent workflow for our users, rather than utilising different software per platform, it could be a useful innovation to standardise on Microsoft Teams for all platforms when providing remote support"._



No, Microsoft Teams screen sharing remote control is far less useful than Microsoft Quick Assist.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 8, 2021)

grahamperrin said:


> Wrong.


Oh? So you can get a Quick Assist binary for other platforms? Now that doesn't sound like the Microsoft we know and love.



grahamperrin said:


> No, Microsoft Teams screen sharing remote control is far less useful than Microsoft Quick Assist.



If you say so. I am sure it is so incredibly critical to everyones work that absolutely *no* compromise can be made. Even to enable access to more productive platforms


----------



## zirias@ (Jul 8, 2021)

Stop feeding the troll... pretty please


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 9, 2021)

Please try to not twist my words. 



kpedersen said:


> By integral to Windows 10, you really just mean that Microsoft doesn't provide a binary for any other platform but Windows 10 right?



Wrong. That's what you say, but it's *not* what I mean.

I meant exactly what I wrote at <https://forums.FreeBSD.org/threads/78639/post-521584>, no more no less: *Quick Assist is integral to Windows 10*. 

<https://forums.FreeBSD.org/threads/78639/post-521210> *Windows 10 is a requirement* for my role. 

My role is not limited to Microsoft Quick Assist, or Microsoft Teams. I provide IT support. I'm surrounded by _hundreds_ of computers running Windows 10. 



kpedersen said:


> … If you say so. …



I say that *Teams screen sharing remote control is far less useful than Quick Assist* because (amongst other things): 

with Teams, it's too easy to lose control through inadvertent clicks on a remote part of the screen that's invisible to the controller.
An *invisible* part of the user interface is not good UX when a person is attempting to remotely control the underlying part that's visible to, but not controllable by, the controller. 

Remote control that loses control is not good remote control.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 9, 2021)

grahamperrin said:


> *Windows 10 is a requirement* for my role.
> 
> My role is not limited to Microsoft Quick Assist, or Microsoft Teams. I provide IT support. I'm surrounded by _hundreds_ of computers running Windows 10.


At risk of twisting your words, I suppose it is because I flat out disagree with your statement (in fact I think it is a little bizarre). I know guys happily running a mac or Linux laptop that deal with thousands of Windows clients. Actually I think consumer Windows is completely inadequate for this role.



grahamperrin said:


> Remote control that loses control is not good remote control.


But its good enough for the mac guys? So much so that it hasn't warranted you looking for alternatives such as Apple Remote Desktop (*"Integral"* to macOS)?

Btw, I am not trying to be argumentative here (though I possibly seem to be coming across this way!). I am trying to find a solution because at the moment you seem to be using Microsoft -only software for the sake of Microsoft. And from experience it is always annoying when internal company tech support do that. It is so old fashioned. This is not the 90s anymore and things won't change if people keep doing this. If you can at work, try to push back a little.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jul 9, 2021)

He's got a point. I believe their more recent Server Admin, and Azure stuff is all web based too. I mean, you're still paying Microsoft, but the experience is more "open".


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 9, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> … you seem to be using Microsoft -only software for the sake of Microsoft. …



Maybe your anti-Microsoft sentiment is clouding my words.

I want to boot FreeBSD. FreeBSD is not Microsoft-only software.

FreeBSD can not boot the computer that I'll be given, so I'll:

boot Windows 10, which is designed to work with the hardware
make best use of Windows 10
boot FreeBSD in VirtualBox
free myself from some of the problems that are associated with FreeBSD.



> But its good enough for the mac guys?



No.

Remote control that loses control is not good remote control.



> So much so that it hasn't warranted you looking for alternatives such as Apple Remote Desktop (*"Integral"* to macOS)?



I'm familiar with Apple Remote Desktop. If you had looked at my profile, you'd have seen that I'm ex-AppleSeed. More:



grahamperrin said:


> … years before public betas became a thing, I was AppleSeed member 405 (that's the 405 in my avatar here); and part of a much smaller group (membership unknown) that tested builds of Feedback Assistant before the Assistant was made available to other members of AppleSeed.



I began supporting Macs in 1993 – long before I began supporting Windows. I administered XServe, XServe RAID, and so on.



grahamperrin said:


> … Mac OS X Server 10.0 (with Mac OS X largely the reason for my presence here, although I never introduced myself) and before that, AppleShare IP 5.0.


----------



## mer (Jul 9, 2021)

I've seen threads go off topic before but I think we are at the equivalent of driving from New York City to Los Angeles via Bangkok.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 9, 2021)

mer said:


> I've seen threads go off topic before but I think we are at the equivalent of driving from New York City to Los Angeles via Bangkok.


Heh, perhaps. Though in some ways it is quite handy to discuss what is blocking people moving entirely to FreeBSD. Things like remote assistance are quite related to desktop use after all.



grahamperrin said:


> boot Windows 10, which is designed to work with the hardware


That is marketing speech. That hardware is probably a computer. FreeBSD is also designed for computers. If everyone followed this, no-one would be running FreeBSD natively on their laptops would they?

I suppose I am still not entirely convinced why you enforce Windows 10's Quick Assist (because web Teams is inadequate) and yet don't enforce Apple Remote Desktop (because web Teams is inadequate). However so long as you have carried out your professional due diligence (rather than just going with Microsoft due to tradition), then I am certainly in no position to complain (though I absolutely would if one of our tech support guys was needlessly pushing Windows on my team. It does happen occasionally).


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 9, 2021)

mer said:


> … driving from New York City to Los Angeles via Bangkok.



 let's not forget that we're in the off-topic forum …



kpedersen said:


> … Things like remote assistance are quite related to desktop use …











						Solved - VNC connections to macOS
					

When I last tried, a few months ago, none of the VNC clients on my FreeBSD computer could connect to VNC service on an adjacent iMac (macOS Catalina, 10.15.⋯).   I wasn't entirely surprised, because I had some trouble making VNC connections to Macs years ago. Probably long before I began using...




					forums.freebsd.org


----------



## Aeterna (Jul 9, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> Heh, perhaps. Though in some ways it is quite handy to discuss what is blocking people moving entirely to FreeBSD. Things like remote assistance are quite related to desktop use after all.
> 
> 
> That is marketing speech. That hardware is probably a computer. FreeBSD is also designed for computers. If everyone followed this, no-one would be running FreeBSD natively on their laptops would they?
> ...


I don't know about your experience with large networks but in my case I am required to use managed laptop with specific software installed. None available for FreeBSD. To keep running FreeBSD should I look for a new job?
MS products may not be safe (that is why often they are behind UNIX servers) but they provide software that has no match outside MS (e.g. collaboration).
So while I see a lot of FreeBSD/linux servers around, laptop/desktop is out of reach for either. 
Few days ago someone was complaining about missing Gnome3, I remember missing libreoffice (for quite some time), this is not acceptable if one wants to use laptop/workstation at work (or at home). Of course 99% of scientific software (in my case) is just not available for FreeBSD unless web based. 
As soon as these issues are solved, large companies may consider switching from MS, but I am using BSD/Solaris/linux/Apple/MS for 25yrs on personal computers and this (wide range of specialized high quality personal software offering) is not happening. 

Same goes in the case of hardware: to be safe when buying new laptop/desktop, ideally I should consider at best 1yr old hardware (not newer) for compatibility sake. Still I need to do a lot of research before buying the hardware. This is possible for enthusiasts

Even on my personal laptop I need Windows in VM for photoediting (in my case), music astro. You name it.

This is not a *marketing speech*, this is reality.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 9, 2021)

Aeterna said:


> I don't know about your experience with large networks but in my case I am required to use managed laptop with specific software installed. None available for FreeBSD. To keep running FreeBSD should I look for a new job?
> MS products may not be safe (that is why often they are behind UNIX servers) but they provide software that has no match outside MS (e.g. collaboration).


Put together a proper list and prepare to make a few compromises and you might be surprised. Yes, I would suggest that in 2021 I find most Microsoft products have moved to the nonsense cloud. Office365, Teams, Sharepoint I would not install an application for. The great thing is that Microsoft is more and more moving that way anyway for monetisation purposes.

A classic one I hear my colleagues citing is Visual Studio being Windows-only so they can't migrate. Absolutely, if they choose to use a Microsoft specific product, then they are kind of at fault. Not FreeBSD (or Linux). And for everything else there is a virtual machine. Even on a Windows machine, I would suggest refusing to run things like Teams or Skype outside of a VM anyway.

As for hardware, many companies that do enforce Linux quite happily procure the correct stuff. So hardware limitations is really not an excuse. Hardware is cheap, especially for non-consumer business stuff. A good place to start is the RHCL catalog. A 2019 ThinkPad X1 Carbon is a good option. Possibly newer than many companies will go for anyway.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 9, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> … That is marketing speech. …



I could more accurately have said that there are some pleasing results from collaboration between HP and Microsoft.



kpedersen said:


> … I am still not entirely convinced why you enforce Windows 10's Quick Assist (because web Teams is inadequate) …



I never mentioned web Teams. And so on.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 9, 2021)

grahamperrin said:


> I never mentioned web Teams. And so on.


Ah it was because you mentioned that MS Teams was no good. Teams or web Teams are very similar (actually desktop teams is pretty much nothing more than a web browser container that runs web teams with some extra gizmos).

I only referred to web teams specifially because that is what you will want to strive for if you intend to run FreeBSD at work. I use it occasionally (mainly for calls and some remote debugging).


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 9, 2021)

I rarely need to use an installed version of Teams, or Teams in Chromium. 

I most often use Teams in Firefox, not bothered by the limitations.


----------



## ct85711 (Jul 9, 2021)

For me, I actually dislike the web version of the software.  The biggest reason is that the web version is always less performant and also a trimmed down version with several functionality removed.  So I'm restricted from using FreeBSD on my primary machines, until an alternative software is available.  I'm not restricting on specific software works, but an alternative to replace with (with communication software can communicate on that network/platform).


----------



## Aeterna (Jul 9, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> Put together a proper list and prepare to make a few compromises and you might be surprised.


This is theory talking. Why would anyone compromise if there is no need for that? Assuming that I get FreeBSD on the laptop, what is it worth without professional software that I need? Boot it up and browse the internet?

It really does not matter what and why would you refuse if an alternative does not work.
I will give you an example, you will find a solution, I will talk to our IT.

Get me professional confocal microscopy software (hardware from Nikon costs ~$20K a piece) that runs on FreeBSD.


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Jul 9, 2021)

Linus Torvalds was once asked why Linux does not rule the desktop, beside it being free and the era of desktop Linux being predicted at least for over a decade lingering just around the corner. 

His answer was quite simple: because Linux is not shipped preinstalled with most sold computers. The same applies to FreeBSD.


----------



## mer (Jul 9, 2021)

I think what this thread shows it that it's really never about the OS, it's about what applications(functionality) you truly need, what applications you want and how to run them.
Plain text email?  Almost doesn't matter what the OS is.
Application XYZ that your business demands?  Can you get it for your desired OS, with the needed features on that OS?
Can you afford those applications?

Aeterna has a good example.  A question would be:
could someone pay enough money to port an existing application to FreeBSD for his needs, and does FreeBSD provide enough to run it?


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 9, 2021)

Aeterna said:


> This is theory talking. Why would anyone compromise if there is no need for that?


I would happily compromise and run a web Teams if it meant keeping with FreeBSD. For me it isn't really that theoretical. I have very much put it into practice with my day to day work. I'm surprised more guys aren't doing similar, just because they like to install Microsoft's cloud software rather than run from browser?



Aeterna said:


> Get me professional confocal microscopy software (hardware from Nikon costs ~$20K a piece) that runs on FreeBSD.


You really need this for your work laptop?



ct85711 said:


> For me, I actually dislike the web version of the software.


That may be so. But you would honestly rather be stuck with Windows for everything rather than just suck it up and use a web app for one specific service? That seems like a crazy compromise.


----------



## mer (Jul 9, 2021)

I guess I've been lucky in my career.  I run FreeBSD at home, have been for a long time, the versions of the applications do what I need, OpenVPN to get back to work machines, VNC to a linux desktop at work, Chromium with webcamd on the BSD boxes works for Google Meet stuff.
I've got an older lenovo thinkpad running Win10 that is only used to check out the upgrade stuff so I can fix wife's machine and minor work things.

darktable works well enough for me in a non professional fashion with a D610.  I miss the smell of stop bath and fixer and Rodinal.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Jul 9, 2021)

My perfectly good TracPhone that I purchased and loaded a $20 card on was obsolete because it wasn't 5G.

I wanted holographic images of Michael Jackson doing the moonwalk projected in front of me while I converse telephonically and the $20 bill with some guy on the front who I just don't remember anything about that was purged from history by the Ministry of Truth Movement last summer but didn't get either.

I need a safe space and a puppy.  And I might need changed.

No, I'm alright.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 9, 2021)

mer said:


> does FreeBSD provide enough to run it?


Without question.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 9, 2021)

mer said:


> I miss the smell of stop bath and fixer and Rodinal.


Amen brother.


----------



## ct85711 (Jul 9, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> That may be so. But you would honestly rather be stuck with Windows for everything rather than just suck it up and use a web app for one specific service? That seems like a crazy compromise.


Honestly, I am more of in the waiting field.  The reason, is that the software is available on linux which does work; but on FreeBSD it needs a convoluted mess just to get it to work.  This is outside of getting the Linux Subsystem and necessary linux libraries installed.  Sadly, none of the linux software is open source to work on porting them.

The only package that I've seen that may potentially be an alternative is Pidgin, but it is currently be process of having it completely overhauled to gtk3 and that it looking sometime next year to have something to test... It is already known, any plugins from the current (gtk2) have to be rewritten for the new version; so no use looking at the current plugins available.


----------



## ralphbsz (Jul 10, 2021)

hardworkingnewbie said:


> His answer was quite simple: because Linux is not shipped preinstalled with most sold computers.


So, why do the laptop vendors not pre-install Linux (or FreeBSD or something else)?

There are two reasons: Push and pull. First, pre-installing Windows is relatively easy for them. Microsoft has a gigantic department that supports hardware vendors, handles licensing, works with them to customize and tune, and builds its distribution (install, configure, support) mechanisms around the needs of those OEMs. In the Linux world, such a thing just doesn't exist. RedHat had a little bit of it, but it never went much of anywhere, and now that RedHat is being absorbed into IBM (who no longer sells computers to individuals, neither desktops nor laptops), that need won't be seen. And other Linux packaging companies are even smaller. So let's go one step further: Why does Microsoft do this, and "Linux" does not? Because Microsoft is customer and user focused. Microsoft knows who buys their products, in the case of OS licenses mostly OEMs, and it is willing to help its customers make that an easy and profitable experience. Microsoft knows who its end users are (in the case of Windows, the humans who push buttons and move mouses, not the OEMs), and it tries to create a product focused on the needs and wants of those humans. In contrast, Linux is run by engineering and computer science types, for whom the beauty and elegance of a line of kernel code, or the coding style of a DE, is much more important than whether it is easy to install and support, or whether users actually like using it. So Microsoft pushes windows.

Now on the pull side: Windows has an extremely large market share of the desktop/laptop market, whether you like that or not. That means that for users of computers, choosing Windows is a pretty easy and safe choice: the skills are there, creating a support infrastructure is easy, it is relatively risk free. So users want Windows, and vendors are happy to oblige.

It also means that people who write software (applications) need to first and foremost support Windows (which gets them about 90% of the market), then Macintosh (which gets them to about 99%), and only after that they need to worry about the Unixes. And many software vendors stop after the first or second step. I have so many examples of minor software products that only support Windows. Not because the makers are evil and hate FreeBSD, but because of very simple economics. Often (perhaps even typically), those are commercial products that are not in-and-of themselves profitable, but are needed to support other products, for example hardware configuration tools. Current examples for which one needs to use a Windows machine in our household or with neighbors: The monitoring tools for Omega industrial controllers, the setup tool for UPB remote-controllable light switches, and a software package our neighbor uses for tuning his ECU (engine control unit) on a modified Corvette via the OBD2 port. All these are small software projects, not distributed to millions of customers, and created by "small" companies (much smaller than IBM/Microsoft/Google) that don't specialize in software, but have to do a little software to support their real products. For them, Windows makes perfect sense: it gets you a very large market penetration for just one investment. The RoI on supporting Mac is small by comparison.

Classic example of Network effect. Esther Dyson put it really well: Microsoft won the election for preferred desktop software perfectly fairly. Unfortunately, our system does not allow for a second election.


----------



## scottro (Jul 10, 2021)

I don't know if this is still true, but I do remember that at one point, Dell was offering Ubuntu laptops. However, they weren't easy to find on the page and I feel as if I remember them being more expensive than the Windows equivalent.  When netbooks seemed like they were going to be a thing, Asus, (I think) offered a Linux version with a very slow 8-10 G hard drive, running a customized version of Fedora. It was horrible.  Then they offered a Windows one with a 160 G hard drive. I wound up returning the Linux one and wiping Windows and installing Linux on the Windows one.

At present, Lenovo offers Linux  laptops with either Fedora or Ubuntu. I don't know how they compare with equivalent Windows laptops.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jul 10, 2021)

OE vendors tip-toe into shipping Linux because they know it's a broken system with a hostile community. Just look at the treatment Nvidia receives.


----------



## ct85711 (Jul 10, 2021)

Honestly, a lot of Nvidia's treatment stems from how they interact with the Linux community.  This isn't something new either, as they treated Linux with the same treatment as when blacks were enslaved.  This also applied to other companies too, as I know ATI often had the same philosophy way before they were bought out.  Think about how Nvidia is treating FreeBSD as it is now? We already know we are not even getting the same support as Linux has been getting for the same hardware.  Lately, it's been appearing more that Nvidia has been dragging it's feet when others has already started taking advantage of open source software to make a profit.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 10, 2021)

Dell computers with Linux



scottro said:


> … was offering Ubuntu …



Current UK offers:

Ubuntu Laptop Computers & 2-in-1 PCs (two _data science workstations_)
Ubuntu Desktop Computers (three _data science workstations_)
Ubuntu | Dell UK ▶ Dell Linux Recovery Image | Dell UK etc.

HP computers with Linux

HP Z2 Mini | The world's first mini workstation _designed for CAD users_ - HP Store UK

HP ZBook Fury 15 G7 (2021-05-12)

… maybe more; HP Workstations Linux Hardware Matrix (2021-06-25)


----------



## ralphbsz (Jul 10, 2021)

Scottro: There has always been a niche business with Linux (and other Unix) laptops. Matter-of-fact, in all of my recent jobs (last ~25 years), I've had some colleagues who use various Unix flavors on their desktop or laptop. And since about 2005 or so, my employers have supported that, and issued laptops pre-installed with Linux. But: Compared to the huge number of people using Windows and Mac, that's a drop in the bucket. And a lot of the actual laptops are bought with a Windows license, and then people just wipe the disk and install the OS of their choice. For example, all my non-Mac laptops I have at home (I'm down to about 4 or 5) have a sticker on the bottom with their Windows license number, and if I wanted to, I could refresh their OSes.

And OEMs like Dell have sold Linux machines for ages. In tiny numbers, and usually non-existing support.

Today, way more engineers use Chromebooks instead of Unix laptops. All the interesting computers are in the cloud anyway, so who cares what CPU and OS is attached to your keyboard and monitor.

How many people remember the Alpha (TadPole), PowerPC (ThinkPad 800) and Sparc laptops? The Alpha one was particularly funny, as its battery life under load was minutes.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 10, 2021)

ralphbsz said:


> … Compared to the huge number of people using Windows and Mac, that's a drop in the bucket. …



True. 

We have some Linux-based labs, but these are extraordinary.



ralphbsz said:


> … way more engineers use Chromebooks instead of Unix laptops …



I did look at Neverware around eighteen months ago (before it became part of Google): 5 Options for Windows 7 End of Life — Neverware


----------



## sidetone (Jul 10, 2021)

ct85711, those comparisons are a stretch.


----------



## Beastie7 (Jul 10, 2021)

ct85711 said:


> Think about how Nvidia is treating FreeBSD as it is now? We already know we are not even getting the same support as Linux has been getting for the same hardware.



As far as X.org is concerned; the Nvidia drivers work incredibly well on FreeBSD.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 10, 2021)

ralphbsz said:


> Compared to the huge number of people using Windows and Mac, that's a drop in the bucket.


I do notice that a lot of companies enforcing Windows is due to an old corporate policy being set many years ago, back when Windows had a much clearer edge in the market, in terms of price and functionality. A mix of Windows regressing as a consumer OS and free platforms becoming stronger has changed this balance. However many of these corporate policies remain. Though I do think people should start to see them more for what they are. Arbitrary.

I actually find the popularity of macOS an interesting symptom. They are hard to fix, difficult to procure hardware (in bulk for an enterprise) and yet they actually seem to hold a strong market-share even after all this. Perhaps it shows that people really are not happy with Windows. Or it simply shows Apple is better at marketing. Obviously Apple's targetting of Students was a classic ploy to make them relevant in later life and it seems to be working.



ralphbsz said:


> How many people remember the [...] PowerPC (ThinkPad 800)


I did try to get hold of one about 10 years ago (obviously they were old and rare then too!). I am fairly certain if IBM did another batch (even running the same ancient AIX), that they would sell like hotcakes.


----------



## hardworkingnewbie (Jul 10, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> I actually find the popularity of macOS an interesting symptom. They are hard to fix, difficult to procure hardware (in bulk for an enterprise) and yet they actually seem to hold a strong market-share even after all this. Perhaps it shows that people really are not happy with Windows. Or it simply shows Apple is better at marketing. Obviously Apple's targetting of Students was a classic ploy to make them relevant in later life and it seems to be working.


It's quite simple: the TCO of Apple hardware is much much lower compared to having a Windows computer for a company. People using MacOS are happier, more productive and you do need much less support staff for them compared to Windows.

Even more important for corporate/professional users, who want to get their job done and do need the industry standard tools being available to do so, on MacOS most of these tools/programs are being available natively: Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Indesign, Logic Pro, Final Cut Pro and so on. So these users don't have to retrain themselves to a new program, but instead can use what they're used to have since ages. Big plus. And this data then is of course totally interchangeable with the Windows world, if the need is there, another big plus.

By the way if you don't believe that the TCO of a amount of Apple hardware is lower than having a big amount of Windows computers: this is not my imagination, nor opinion. This is the result of IBM having rolled out over 200.000 Macs globally since 2015, and having done a thoroughly analysis on that hardware including all costs.

According to IBM they do need 22 people as support staff to support 5400 PC users, for the same amount of Macs they do need just one person. IBM manages to support the over 200000 Macs with just 7 employees. These are by no small margin indeed impressive numbers.

So it is IBM telling us: while Apple is more expensive to buy, people using it are happier, more productive, can use their beloved tools they'
ve grown to use, doing a better job, stay longer in the company and it needs much much less support compared to Windows. Under that angle it is quite understandable that Apple hardware makes a lot of sense in a corporate environment.


----------



## PMc (Jul 10, 2021)

ralphbsz said:


> Scottro: There has always been a niche business with Linux (and other Unix) laptops. Matter-of-fact, in all of my recent jobs (last ~25 years), I've had some colleagues who use various Unix flavors on their desktop or laptop. And since about 2005 or so, my employers have supported that, and issued laptops pre-installed with Linux. But: Compared to the huge number of people using Windows and Mac, that's a drop in the bucket. And a lot of the actual laptops are bought with a Windows license, and then people just wipe the disk and install the OS of their choice.


Yes, because they know how to do that!

That is the essential point: all of us who are discussing here are expected to know what we do: to know at least the basics of how a computer works, what a disk is, what a filesystem is, etc.

Now lets face it: knowing how a computer works is *not considered cool*! It is not the image of a role model in some social regard.
Rather the opposite: people tend to be proud to _not know_ how a computer works. (Specifically managers of IT-companies agree on being very proud not to know what a computer is. They instead know that the figures are important, and that is what counts.)

It is specifically these people who are targeted by the Windows offering. (And it is those of them who deem themselve 'elite' who are targeted by the AppleMac offering.) The difference is: Windows is not an OS. It is a program loader for viruses - and this is unique, it's the only way you can get viruses!

And this can be taken a lot further, it is not only concerning computers. In a time of mostly rural work it is desireable to have a pale skin. In a time of mostly office work it becomes desireable to have tanned skin. In a time of information overflow it becomes desireable to _not know_. (because it respectively translates to affording the leasure.)
And THAT is the actual Windows offering. Why else should somebody buy a computer for private use? Running computers is not a thing that makes you get the girls laid.

So, the important point is not that people use Windows instead of Linux or Berkeley, that is just a corollary. The really important (and very dangerous) issue is that we now have a culture where the elite is distinguished by not knowing about the things they do.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 10, 2021)

hardworkingnewbie said:


> This is the result of IBM having rolled out over 200.000 Macs globally since 2015, and having done a thoroughly analysis on that hardware including all costs.


Thats cool. I would never have even believed IBM would have rolled out Macs! These guys haven't acted outside of the corporate box since before the 90's. In some ways I love them for that. They are like a living(?) museum.

My personal experience with TCO isn't with Windows itself but the corporate "image" of Windows that the IT services spit out. All the drivers are completely fscky and I have yet to see a roaming profile ever work on Windows. This maintenance is what costs (time and loss of productivity mainly).



PMc said:


> Yes, because they know how to do that!


Sadly I am just seeing a lot of guys who "_know how to do that_" being constrained by dumb internal policies. Or a single (perceived!) "must have" app that the higher ups have arbitrarily chosen due to a cooler colour scheme.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 10, 2021)

hardworkingnewbie said:


> … the TCO of a amount of Apple hardware is lower than having a big amount of Windows computers …



This can be true.



hardworkingnewbie said:


> … According to IBM they do need 22 people as support staff to support 5400 PC users, for the same amount of Macs they do need just one person. IBM manages to support the over 200000 Macs with just 7 employees. …



Given the _Jamf Nation User Conference_ context, I wonder whether IBM spends ~$28 million more, annually, than the salaries of those seven people. 

Food for thought (not definitive), from 2017: 

How Many Help Desk Tier 1 Pros Do You Need? | Robert Half
Determine Your Help Desk Tier 2 Needs | Robert Half
– and Help Desk Staff to User Ratio | ITSM | SolarWinds Service Desk Blog (2018-05-30); and so on.



kpedersen said:


> … a lot of companies enforcing Windows is due to an old corporate policy … Arbitrary. …



Not arbitrary here.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 10, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> I actually find the popularity of macOS an interesting symptom.


When I worked at SGI in the 90s, the first standard issue was a Mac. Everyone had one because all you had to do was plug it in to the network and everything just worked. 

The same is true for my son and all his artistic/filmmaking/stage production folk. Everything they do is on a Mac cause it works everywhere with everything in their industry.


----------



## Jose (Jul 10, 2021)

ralphbsz said:


> Scottro: There has always been a niche business with Linux (and other Unix) laptops. Matter-of-fact, in all of my recent jobs (last ~25 years), I've had some colleagues who use various Unix flavors on their desktop or laptop. And since about 2005 or so, my employers have supported that, and issued laptops pre-installed with Linux...


This is true in my professional bubble as well. I'd go so far as to say that almost all the technical staff is on Mac or Linux. The reason for this is that our deployment environment is Linux. There's just too big of an impedance mismatch with Windows to develop on it and deploy on Linux. Too many problems creep in because of the stark difference in the platforms. Apple did us no favors by deciding to emulate Windows and go with a case-insensitive filesystem by default. This still causes problems sometimes.

But your larger point is well-taken. These professional bubbles are a tiny drop in the bucket compared to the hordes of "Enterprise" Windows users. And even they are a tiny fraction of the hordes of Android and IOS users, which is why I ponder the wisdom of wading into this thread again. We're discussing pre-installing operating systems on desktops like it's 2008. That ship has sailed, folks. The desktop is just not all that important  anymore. Embrace the long tail.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 10, 2021)

drhowarddrfine said:


> … plug it in to the network and everything just worked. …



The Network pane of System Preferences in Mac OS X is *superb*. How to use network locations on your Mac – Apple Support 

If I rate Apple's Network pane five-star … 



… nothing for FreeBSD comes close; the best things are two-star (three if I'm charitable). 

I've been frustrated, by the absence of a good GUI, for years. In recent months I began trying to make things smoother for myself, ultimately I'm more frustrated. I wish I had ignored the whole caboodle.


----------



## ralphbsz (Jul 10, 2021)

kpedersen said:


> I actually find the popularity of macOS an interesting symptom. They are hard to fix, difficult to procure hardware (in bulk for an enterprise) and yet they actually seem to hold a strong market-share even after all this.


They need hardly any fixing. For the most part, the hardware quality is much better than other laptops (exceptions discussed below). The software quality will be discussed below too. Quantity purchasing is trivial, both for education (I've personally bought MacBook Airs by the dozen for education, and my employers buy them by the tens of thousands). Setting up internal upgrade / management servers is trivial, because it is engineered by Apple.

The hardware exception is occasional glitches: MacBook Airs had a string of problems with CPU and GPU chips coming loose from the motherboard; the current generation MacBook Pros has terrible keyboard reliability problems.



> Obviously Apple's targetting of Students was a classic ploy to make them relevant in later life and it seems to be working.


I've worked for a company where many people used Macs, but most employees were of an age that they had NO computers in school, and mainframes using punched cards in college.



> I did try to get hold of one about 10 years ago (obviously they were old and rare then too!). I am fairly certain if IBM did another batch (even running the same ancient AIX), that they would sell like hotcakes.


Doing another batch would be impossible today; one would have to engineer all the chips from scratch. It would actually be faster to emulate the PowerPC instruction set on an Intel or Arm machine.

And I doubt the "selling like hotcakes": Lenovo did a "T20 memorial edition laptop" with the 7-row keyboard recently; they lost their shirt on it: hundreds and hundreds of enthusiasts bought them, but to make a laptop model profitable, you need to hundreds of thousands.



hardworkingnewbie said:


> It's quite simple: the TCO of Apple hardware is much much lower compared to having a Windows computer for a company. People using MacOS are happier, more productive and you do need much less support staff for them compared to Windows.


Exactly. Macs have far fewer problems, and need much less support. And that's the real cost, which dwarves the hardware and software purchase cost. At one former employer, the central IT organization was charging departments $1800/month for every employee, to pay for access to networking, e-mail, internal tools, printing, support; for that charge you also get one laptop or desktop computer. As you can see from the price, the ~$1500 every 2-3 years for the laptop hardware or the $50 for the Windows license is irrelevantly small.



> By the way if you don't believe that the TCO of a amount of Apple hardware is lower than having a big amount of Windows computers: this is not my imagination, nor opinion. This is the result of IBM having rolled out over 200.000 Macs globally since 2015, and having done a thoroughly analysis on that hardware including all costs.


I was at IBM from 2000 onwards. Initially I used a Windows laptop (for a little while, I also had a Linux desktop, until I switched that to Windows). In about 2009, I switched to an (IBM supported and provided) Mac laptop. While corporate IT was pushing Linux laptops for a while, they back-pedaled after the support costs exploded, and made the Mac the preferred platform: simply because of higher productivity (Mac's weren't down often) and less support cost.



> IBM manages to support the over 200000 Macs with just 7 employees.


That number is a mis-interpretation. I would believe that the central IT planning/managing/programming department for Mac's might be 7 people. But the typical deskside and network support staff is more like 1-2% of all employees, meaning about 4,000 support staff at IBM's size. 

(Talking about Linux ...)


PMc said:


> Yes, because they know how to do that!


That is also an important observation. If you take Linux laptops, and issue them to software engineers, you will have very few support problems. That's because the users will fix things themselves. Now take those same Linux laptops and issue them to project managers, budget analysts, mathematicians, analytical chemists (all highly educated and intelligent people), and you have a disaster at your hands. That's because they are not computer people who dig into source code when something isn't perfect. I literally had a colleague who would run a modified Linux kernel on his laptop to optimize something, because he could.



kpedersen said:


> Thats cool. I would never have even believed IBM would have rolled out Macs!


Not only did they roll out Macs very early (I think starting in 2004 or 05), they also resold the used employee Macs to their employees at a steep discount. My home Mac is a 2008 MBP, which I bought used from IBM (my employer) in 2010 or 2011. It still works, and I still use it for personal stuff (alas, without a functioning battery).



> Sadly I am just seeing a lot of guys who "_know how to do that_" being constrained by dumb internal policies. Or a single (perceived!) "must have" app that the higher ups have arbitrarily chosen due to a cooler colour scheme.


Not due to a cooler color scheme. Not due to them wanting "a virus downloader". But due to very sensible efficiency constraints. For example: It makes perfect sense for a whole corporation (whether it is 10 people or half a million) to use a single, coherent e-mail system, which implies everyone using the same mail client (we call that MUA in software land). From a compatibility and support standpoint, it is the only sensible solution. Once in a while, this leads to disasters (current IBM troubles with Notes are an example), but most of the time it is great and necessary.



Jose said:


> I'd go so far as to say that almost all the technical staff is on Mac or Linux. The reason for this is that our deployment environment is Linux. There's just too big of an impedance mismatch with Windows to develop on it and deploy on Linux.


I have been using Windows and Mac as my laptop/desktop machine for just about ever. For the last ~20 years, all my deployment environment has been Linux or a commercial Unix (AIX, HP-UX). As a software engineer, what you run on your laptop has nothing to do with where you deploy, because you don't actually compile and link on your laptop machine. That would be insane: it is way underpowered. The actual work gets done on big iron: mainframe-like machines, clusters, and the cloud, all machines that are very large, highly efficient, and somewhere in a data center. Today, it makes very little difference whether that data center is in the basement of my office building, or on the opposite corner of the continent. Matter-of-fact, from either my home or my office it would take several days by car to reach my main login machine at work.

Other than amateurs, for at least a decade software development has not been happening on the machine that your keyboard and screen are attached to.

Note that this applies to software engineering. Other professions still run on local machines: Graphics, video and audio production, electrical engineering EDA (like CAD tools). This stuff is only very slowly moving off-desk, because of the high-bandwidth user interface needs. For software engineering, with something like emacs/vi, Eclipse, and web-based bug tracking and source control tools, it makes much more sense to run in a data center. One of the advantages: When I say the equivalent of "make", I have anywhere between dozens machines and thousands of them at my disposal.



> And even they are a tiny fraction of the hordes of Android and IOS users, which is why I ponder the wisdom of wading into this thread again. We're discussing pre-installing operating systems on desktops like it's 2008. That ship has sailed, folks. The desktop is just not all that important  anymore. Embrace the long tail.


From a total computing throughput point of view, that is totally true. Somewhere I saw a statistic that about 80% of all computer usage, as measured by web traffic, now comes from two OSes: Android and iOS. But for user-interface intensive tasks (such as engineering), the laptop is still the preferred mode.


----------



## Deleted member 30996 (Jul 10, 2021)

PMc said:


> Rather the opposite: people tend to be proud to _not know_ how a computer works. (Specifically managers of IT-companies agree on being very proud not to know what a computer is.


I would be the employee from Hell and it's a good thing I do not work there because I already know what would happen.

They suffer from a psychological condition known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect. A cognitive bias and error in thought processing in which someone who is in reality of relatively low intelligence believes they are smarter than everyone and can't see for themselves what is obvious to everyone else.

We see it here quite often. Although you might not have been aware there was a formal name for it beyond the one I used in addressing the issue just a couple days ago.

This being my field as a Qualified Mental Retardation Professional, having been open and honest about never working IT, or finishing High School, please allow me to document it for reliable future reference for readers forthwith.

Not to mention the the added benefit of those who may think I am afflicted with it, and please, be brutally honest and verbose in telling me if I do, because how else will I ever know?  

This article also addresses questions that have been previously posed about a woman's ability to work in the tech field:



> The effect is named after researchers David Dunning and Justin Kruger, the two social psychologists who first described it. In their original study on this psychological phenomenon, they performed a series of four investigations.
> 
> People who scored in the lowest percentiles on tests of grammar, humor, and logic also tended to dramatically overestimate how well they had performed (their actual test scores placed them in the 12th percentile, but they estimated that their performance placed them in the 62nd percentile).
> 
> ...



It goes on.

The women believed they were incompetent because they had been programmed to believe it by a society that promoted a cognitive bias as a Standard Belief. More commonly known as spousal abuse in the home environment.


----------



## Alain De Vos (Jul 10, 2021)

I worked at a datacenter. And before entering the serverroom was a big console room. Full of terminals and comfortable chairs. The idea behind it was to limit physical access to the serverroom as much as possible. E.g. for if someone accidentaly would pull out a power cable or network cable.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 10, 2021)

Trihexagonal said:


> … This article also addresses questions that have been previously posed about a woman's ability to work in the tech field: … <https://www.verywellmind.com/an-overview-of-the-dunning-kruger-effect-4160740> …



A great article, thanks.



ralphbsz said:


> … resold the used employee Macs to their employees at a steep discount. My home Mac is a 2008 MBP, which I bought used from IBM (my employer) in 2010 or 2011. …



I'd love this to happen (not just for Macs) in my environment, but there's simply not the infrastructure for it to happen attractively. Maybe in the future. 

For now, I work to a write-off and disposal policy that sometimes bothers me, personally, but I understand the corporate reasoning.


----------



## ralphbsz (Jul 10, 2021)

Alain De Vos said:


> I worked at a datacenter. And before entering the serverroom was a big console room. Full of terminals and comfortable chairs. The idea behind it was to limit physical access to the serverroom as much as possible. E.g. for if someone accidentaly would pull out a power cable or network cable.


Old joke: The way to run a computer (in today's world, a data center) is to hire a man and a dog. The man is there to feed the dog. The dog is there to bite the man if he tries to touch the computer.

Today's big data center operators are all trying to replace data center technicians with robots, for tasks like deploying/removing racks of servers, building racks, swapping disks or motherboards, and maintenance like fan and filter cleaning. Why? Not because robots are cheaper. They are not, building automatable data centers is expensive, and implementing robotics is heinously expensive. No, because robots are more reliable and don't make mistakes.

The storage industry has actually studied this, and it finds over and over that humans are the #1 source of data loss. Not disk drives (we have that under control with RAID), not natural disasters (we do geographic replication for that), but dumb mistakes. The classic one is this: You have a pair of drives for simple mirroring in the server. In normal operation, both drives have a green blinking LED on the front, indicating that they have power and are performing IO. The left drive fails. No problem, an automated system detects that, turns on the red LED on the left drive, and notifies field service automatically. Field service shows up with a spare drive, logs in, and types the command for beginning the replacement process. The system turns on a bright blinking blue LED on the left drive, to help the human find the failed drive. The human pulls out the right drive, puts in a new spare, ignores the fact that they now have two blinking red LEDs, puts the good drive (with the only good copy of the data) into the recycling bin, and leaves, leaving the customer with data loss. This is not a joke, this is a real-world scenario that happens all the time. And this is why high end storage systems have little solenoid-operated locks on the disk trays, which prevent field service from removing disks unless the system agrees that they need to be replaced.


----------



## Jose (Jul 12, 2021)

ralphbsz said:


> I have been using Windows and Mac as my laptop/desktop machine for just about ever. For the last ~20 years, all my deployment environment has been Linux or a commercial Unix (AIX, HP-UX). As a software engineer, what you run on your laptop has nothing to do with where you deploy, because you don't actually compile and link on your laptop machine.


My laptop builds the source I'm working on as soon as I save a change. It's Eclipse that does this for me, and Intellij Idea for most of my coworkers.

I occasionally run the Gradle build locally too to make sure I haven't broken it, or to run the unit tests outside of Eclipse just to be sure.


ralphbsz said:


> That would be insane: it is way underpowered. The actual work gets done on big iron: mainframe-like machines, clusters, and the cloud, all machines that are very large, highly efficient, and somewhere in a data center.


Our system is broken up into many smaller projects that are more or less independent. My mac is more than powerful enough to build any one of them. I get annoyed when a build takes more than 10 seconds (I blame Gradle).

The QA, Staging, and Production builds are done in crappy little containers running under AWS's Elastic Container Service. They are way less powerful than my Mac.


ralphbsz said:


> Other than amateurs, for at least a decade software development has not been happening on the machine that your keyboard and screen are attached to.


I guess that makes me an amateur! Nobody tell my employer! I need that paycheck.


----------



## kpedersen (Jul 12, 2021)

Jose said:


> I guess that makes me an amateur! Nobody tell my employer! I need that paycheck.


Heh same. Quick iterations are so important to me. Possibly I have a slightly OCD habit to build after every ~5 lines of code. I need reassurance! 

Though certainly the production build (for each target platform) is rarely done from my workstation. For that we have a big scatty mishmash of servers that no-one remembers who set up. They seem to think it was me but I have no memory of this.


----------



## ralphbsz (Jul 12, 2021)

Jose said:


> Our system is broken up into many smaller projects that are more or less independent. My mac is more than powerful enough to build any one of them. I get annoyed when a build takes more than 10 seconds (I blame Gradle).


An interesting way to do it. I haven't seen anything like this in a long time. I used to get upset at long build times, when they reached a minute or two. But using larger and larger clusters fixed that for me.

Different technique. Interesting.


----------



## CuatroTorres (Jul 13, 2021)

Should we have a party when we reach answer number 200? Open proposals.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jul 13, 2021)

Jose said:


> I get annoyed when a build takes more than 10 seconds


One company I worked for had expanded and we only had one PDP-8 (?) for all the engineers. When I had to compile my code, mostly assembly but changing to C, it would take hours to complete. Eventually we convinced management to get us one of those new Sun computer things that had just come out.


----------



## grahamperrin@ (Jul 13, 2021)

grahamperrin said:


> … Teams screen sharing remote control is far less useful than Microsoft Quick Assist.



For entertainment (this type of thing is not unusual): 






Sense of humour: essential in these situations.


----------



## Jose (Jul 13, 2021)

drhowarddrfine said:


> One company I worked for had expanded and we only had one PDP-8 (?) for all the engineers. When I had to compile my code, mostly assembly but changing to C, it would take hours to complete. Eventually we convinced management to get us one of those new Sun computer things that had just come out


Too bad there was no XKCD at the time. This might've helped you with management:


----------

