# How rare am I?



## Megameneer (Jan 7, 2015)

Hello everybody,

I am 17 years old and running FreeBSD on my laptop because Linux crashes in very weird ways on this thing. As a "distrohopper", I have used FreeBSD in the past when I was 16. It was a little slow for browsing (but my computer was age-old) and word processing but it worked.

I've heard FreeBSD’s userbase is getting older and older due to the conservative approach. I don't know if that's true, but I've never met anyone who successfully installed FreeBSD on a machine. As a matter of fact, I've never met anyone who knew what FreeBSD was. Now, I am wondering, how rare are 16 year olds that have succesfully installed FreeBSD on a machine?

Cheers,
Dennis


----------



## bsdkeith (Jan 7, 2015)

Pretty rare, I would think. 
Leaving out M.S.Windows, after Linux, the most used system for the home user is likely to be FreeBSD, but at what age a user installs it I have no idea.
Welcome aboard.


----------



## Oko (Jan 7, 2015)

17? Man you are a late bloomer


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 7, 2015)

Don't forget Mac OS X, but I get your point, although I am wondering about the desktop market share of FreeBSD and if that's more than 0,1%. But hey, FreeBSD is (mostly) not build for that goal (I think), yet it still gives a kick to run the same software as the most busiest networks in the world...


----------



## Oko (Jan 7, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> I am wondering about the desktop market share of FreeBSD...


 You can stop wondering right now. Desktop market share of all BSDs combined is 0%.


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 7, 2015)

Yet there are still some people on the Net who are claiming they use FreeBSD for the desktop, although I think they must be rather diehard. Or they experience significantly better performance - I read this once in a GhostBSD review


----------



## kpa (Jan 7, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> Yet there are still some people on the Net who are claiming they use FreeBSD for the desktop, although I think they must be rather diehard. Or they experience significantly better performance - I read this once in a GhostBSD review



If you know what you're doing you can build your own desktop system using a BSD OS. It's not really for everyone because of the steep learning curve involved. If you're looking for an alternative (to MS Windows) and well supported desktop system your best bet is OS X at the moment.


----------



## protocelt (Jan 7, 2015)

Oko said:


> You can stop wondering right now. Desktop market share of all BSDs combined is 0%.


Common now Oko, it's at least 0.003% market share and growing.  kpa beat me to the rest of what I was going to write.


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 7, 2015)

And those iMacs look soooo nice. If you want to have an interior anno 2015, (I think) an iMac will really make the finishing touch. But I don't have the money to buy an iMac or even a cheap-ass Windows laptop. And if I had it, I wouldn't spend it, but save it up for a Burton car (Google that). I am running old PC's (Compaq Presario from 2003) daily and I am happy with it. I can do any homework I need on those things. Linux is my preferred choice but my laptop suffers from capacitor plague and Linux often crashes on it, the harder I let it work, the sooner it crashes. Then it gets into a state of zero activity (even the hard drive stops spinning after 10 seconds) and when I drag my finger over the trackpad, the computer springs back to life but then the WiFi is down. Also, when I don't have a splash screen installed, there is a chance (it occurs so randomly, I just can't determine how big it is) that my screen is black after switching to high resolution console. FreeBSD doesn't seem to have this, although I can't get out of X (can't go to a different terminal and whwn I exit X, the screen turns black)


----------



## Oko (Jan 7, 2015)

protocelt said:


> Common now Oko, it's at least 0.003% market share and growing.


0% is rounded up  number.


----------



## wblock@ (Jan 7, 2015)

protocelt said:


> Common now Oko, it's at least 0.003% market share and growing.


Better than 7% if you count OSX.  Which I will, just because.


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 7, 2015)

kpa said:


> If you know what you're doing you can build your own desktop system using a BSD OS. It's not really for everyone because of the steep learning curve involved. If you're looking for an alternative (to MS Windows) and well supported desktop system your best bet is OS X at the moment.


And I know what I'm doing. At 17 year old, sitting behind a Fluxbox desktop with XTerm at the top of the menu. And XTerm is there not for nothing: I apply my command-line swag on it a lot during the day.

Little will achieve so many swag points at such a low age


----------



## Dies_Irae (Jan 7, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> Little will achieve so many swag points at such a low age



_"And, as a general rule, it is more advisable to show your intelligence by saying nothing than by speaking out; for silence is a matter of prudence, whilst speech has something in it of vanity. The opportunities for displaying the one or the other quality occur equally often; but the fleeting satisfaction afforded by speech is often preferred to the permanent advantage secured by silence"_
_Arthur Schopenhauer_​
_"Enemies of truth. Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."_
_Friedrich Nietzsche_​
Never overestimate yourself.


----------



## pkubaj (Jan 8, 2015)

If you want to be a special snowflake, you should move to NetBSD or even better Plan 9.


----------



## MeesterWood (Jan 8, 2015)

A computer and an operating system are tools. The system administrator is a tradesman, not an artist. Be effective. Save the swagger for something else.


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 8, 2015)

The main reason why I am using FreeBSD is because it is the best option for my computer: Windows is too slow and Linux crashes too often. The second reason is because using Unix is fun, and making old computers usable is fun too. It’s a hobby for me and I am good at it, that’s what I mean with swag. I am living a happy life because when I am doing things for school on my computer (and that’s very often), I am doing my hobby too. I don’t run FreeBSD to be “interesting”. Most people just don’t care about what operating system you run.


----------



## scottro (Jan 8, 2015)

FreeBSD has a very small share--however, so does Linux when one counts all desktops in use.  It can be more work than Linux, but so much depends upon what an individual wants (and has in the way of hardware) that it's impossible to make blanket statements. 

It can be aggravating to buy a refurbished laptop at a good price from Newegg and then find, when you get it, that FreeBSD doesn't support the wireless card.  (BTW folks, if you're looking at that Lenovo L420 at NewEgg for $249, the wireless card isn't supported.)  :-(   But I digress.

Seriously it seems to me that what I read years and years ago in a discussion of mutt vs. pine still holds--people look for all sorts of technical reasons to justify what is in the end an emtional one.  For whatever reason, some O/S or another appeals to an individual. 

TL;DR
You're not that unique, but not that common in your choice of systems.


----------



## CoTones (Jan 8, 2015)

Of course you are strange one, because all smart young people use and develop Linux. May be OpenBSD too. Sadly, you have no choice because of capacitators...


----------



## SirDice (Jan 8, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> I've heard FreeBSD’s userbase is getting older and older due to the conservative approach.


I don't think FreeBSD's conservative approach has anything to do with that. 



> I don't know if that's true, but I've never met anyone who successfully installed FreeBSD on a machine. As a matter of fact, I've never met anyone who knew what FreeBSD was. Now, I am wondering, how rare are 16 year olds that have succesfully installed FreeBSD on a machine?


Don't worry too much about it. I'm 43 and have been working in IT for at least 20 years. The last decade I've been working for a contracting company specializing in UNIX and UNIX-like systems and even I don't meet a lot of people that know what FreeBSD is.


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 8, 2015)

scottro said:


> technical reasons to justify what is in the end an emtional one


That seems to be very common in the Linux world: the buzzing off of other operating systems. . The BSDs are way more tolerant. And I'm glad with that, because I'm fed up with things like vim vs emacs and all that. I think everything has its niche and people should be respected for their choices.


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 8, 2015)

SirDice said:


> and even I don't meet a lot of people that know what FreeBSD is.


I didn't know FreeBSD was _that_ infamous...


----------



## protocelt (Jan 8, 2015)

SirDice said:


> The last decade I've been working for a contracting company specializing in UNIX and UNIX-like systems and even I don't meet a lot of people that know what FreeBSD is.


 Your certainly not the first professional I've heard say that, and I personally find it very surprising given the relevant importance BSD had in the creation of the Internet. One would think more technology professionals would at least know what it is even if they've never used it.


----------



## kpa (Jan 8, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> I didn't know FreeBSD was _that_ infamous...



It's not really that. The problem with FreeBSD is that it missed the boat at the very beginning when open source OSes came on the scene because of the famous lawsuit that held off the development until the lawsuit was settled. Linux for example was written from the ground up around the same time and got a considerable headstart and overtook the competing open source efforts including FreeBSD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USL_v._BSDi


----------



## scottro (Jan 8, 2015)

BTW, I should add (in case there _are_ people looking at that Thinkpad) that the very inexpensive Edimax USB wireless thing works.  But, that is part of the price paid for using a less common O/S.   And, if you like the O/S for whatever reason, you can almost always get it working with a bit of effort.  In the same way, Linux users go to that extra effort to avoid Windows.   (I guess Mac users do too--I remember some program my wife wanted that wasn't available for Apple, though that was at least a year ago.)


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 8, 2015)

scottro said:


> to avoid Windows


But that extra bit makes it also an extra bit more fun, otherwise I would have considered Linux (and FreeBSD) as a waste of time


----------



## protocelt (Jan 8, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> But that extra bit makes it also an extra bit more fun, otherwise I would have considered Linux (and FreeBSD) as a waste of time


If you enjoy learning, you'll enjoy FreeBSD.


----------



## SirDice (Jan 8, 2015)

protocelt said:


> If you enjoy learning, you'll enjoy FreeBSD.


Nothing to add to that really. It was my experience with FreeBSD that gave me the opportunity to go the full UNIX/UNIX-like route. Everything I learned on FreeBSD was easily transferred to Linux and Solaris. In essence they all use the same type of applications anyway, Apache, BIND, Exim, you name it. And because you are forced to configure everything with FreeBSD I was forced to figure out how exactly things worked. That knowledge helped me immensely.


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 8, 2015)

I started to learn how Linux (and as such a lot of Unix) when I read the DSLinux (Linux for Nintendo DS) "getting started" guide. And with Mageia I started to make a sport out of it to do everything on the command line. How did you guys learn Unix?


----------



## protocelt (Jan 8, 2015)

SirDice said:


> Nothing to add to that really. It was my experience with FreeBSD that gave me the opportunity to go the full UNIX/UNIX-like route. Everything I learned on FreeBSD was easily transferred to Linux and Solaris. In essence they all use the same type of applications anyway, Apache, BIND, Exim, you name it. And because you are forced to configure everything with FreeBSD I was forced to figure out how exactly things worked. That knowledge helped me immensely.



While I'm quite a bit down the knowledge ladder form where you're at, I am finding a similar experience.  The more I learn and understand things, the more I enjoy using FreeBSD. I would add that while I still use Windows for certain things, it's starting to become foreign and at times and even a hindrance at this point.



Megameneer said:


> How did you guys learn Unix?


 Speaking for myself, I started using FreeBSD because there was a CD included in a system administration book I bought some years ago on a whim as it looked interesting at the time. I installed it on a spare disk and went from there.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jan 8, 2015)

One thing I never see people mention. FreeBSD is a professional operating system for professional environments so you're far less likely to see it used for gaming, or as much for the desktop, and that's what young people are most likely to use it for. They want something for its ease of use and less for its functionality, such as networking, software writing, etc. That's why you'll always see the BSDs brought up on professional forums but not much on reddit and the like.


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 8, 2015)

drhowarddrfine said:


> One thing I never see people mention. FreeBSD is a professional operating system for professional environments so you're far less likely to see it used for gaming, or as much for the desktop, and that's what young people are most likely to use it for.


And because few people do gaming on FreeBSD, few people improve the gaming experience on FreeBSD (drivers for cutting-edge video cards, Steam, that kind of things). This is also a reason why FreeBSD isn't popular for that.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jan 8, 2015)

That's a bit of chicken and egg. Many, like myself, couldn't care less about improving the gaming experience cause I use computers for work not play. Ignoring the usual web surfing of course.


----------



## Dies_Irae (Jan 8, 2015)

drhowarddrfine said:


> FreeBSD is a professional operating system for professional environments so you're far less likely to see it used for gaming, or as much for the desktop



And for this exact reason, I can't describe the satisfaction of playing Unreal Tournament 3 just for relaxing a bit after several hours passed working on java/eclipse. With a `make buildworld` running in background, obviously...


----------



## ljboiler (Jan 9, 2015)

java/eclipse on FreeBSD has been a hobby of mine for some time.  You must let me know how that's going for you, Dies_Irae .


----------



## petrek (Jan 9, 2015)

Don't listen to them, the true reason why FreeBSD has so few users is as follows: At the beginning of time, BSD creators decided to count the number of their users with two's complement numbers. Alas, they didn't predict that their system will become so highly popular with time, and they've choosed the simplest method to count, just flipped the bits. In result, at one moment of time the number of users actually became negative. But it still grows, and should soon become positive once again!


----------



## ANOKNUSA (Jan 9, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> How did you guys learn Unix?



I cussed at Windows Vista, then realized that no matter how much it pretended otherwise, Windows was in fact just a mindless hunk of code on a mindless hunk of copper and silicon that would not do my bidding just because I screamed foul language at it. Then I installed Ubuntu. Seven years later, here I am.

Closer to the thread topic: "Market share" is a nebulous (read: "meaningless") term. It's a measure of popularity that uses money spent as the standard, and popularity and currency amounts are not measures of quality or usefulness. No offense to any one person or the species in general, but humans are creatures of habit who will prefer convenience in every possible case. This is why so many people equate "computer" with "Windows," and think there's something fundamentally different about Apple machines compared to other PCs---there's no separation between the operating system and actual machine for them, because there's no real reason for them to think otherwise. What they have does what they want in a way they're familiar with. That's also why so many are content to continue thinking that computers are mystical fetishes from beyond the mortal realm, crafted by mad gods and operated by tiny fickle and occasionally mischievous hamster genies running around inside the box. Yeah, everyone complains about Windows, but most people think they're complaining about computers in general when they do so, not understanding that separation between software and hardware. That alternative operating systems exist means nothing, because most people would experience greater discomfort in changing their habits than in continuing to appease the hamster genies. It's easier and more convenient to stick with the familiar. That's just how we are.

That all computers (especially personal computers) run essentially the same technology, and that the technology has largely only changed superficially in the last thirty-odd years, is lost on most people. Others understand it just fine, and it's those folks who go out of their way to create operating systems that do what they want how they want when they want. So long as those people exist there will be alternatives to Windows and OS X, and so long as the people who want those alternatives have the same basic needs as people running Windows and OS X (because we all need to get schoolwork done and organize data and communicate with each other and play our media and generally make a living) they'll continue making quality software to fulfill those needs as well. So Windows has a greater "market share" than Linux, and Linux a greater one than *BSD---so what? Everyone just uses or creates whatever they think will fulfill their needs, using whatever means are at their disposal, and the actual quality or usefulness of each OS is much more subjective than many of us might like to think.


----------



## NewGuy (Jan 9, 2015)

I have worked in various IT offices for over a decade and I don't think I've ever met anyone (in person) who knew what FreeBSD was, let alone anyone who used it. A handful recognized/used Linux, but the majority used Windows for desktops and servers... It feels lonely in the office sometimes.


----------



## bsdkeith (Jan 9, 2015)

My learning curve began back when I picked up a discounted old book that had a CD in the back. 
(it was either Debian 2.1 or RedHat 5.0, neither of which had any form of graphical front end other than curses.)
I had no internet connection back then, not even a modem, so it was use what came on the CD.
Once you start learning the basics, I think, you start looking to see what else is out there, & that is how I came to BSD.

Whilst I freely admit to using Linux as my main O/S, I dabble with *BSD mainly as a hobby, but I like to use the command line on either.
So much power than DOS ever had, especially when you understand why programs were created to do just one job well, so that data could be piped from one to another to get complex jobs done 'fairly' easily by scripting the programs to work together.


----------



## Dies_Irae (Jan 9, 2015)

ljboiler said:


> java/eclipse on FreeBSD has been a hobby of mine for some time.  You must let me know how that's going for you, Dies_Irae .


My current version (Eclipse 4.3.2 "Kepler") works well, except for this bug, but I rarely move the tabs so it's not a great problem. I use the same version at work under Windows 7 (it's a daily suffering...) and my impression is that under FreeBSD it runs faster. Oh, well, we're talking about Windows so it's not a surprise.
But I'm not a so-called "power user", I use it every day but I've never explored all of his features.


----------



## Uniballer (Jan 10, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> How did you guys learn Unix?



Lots of answers: https://forums.freebsd.org/threads/what-got-you-into-unix-linux-bsd.34723/


----------



## EmeraldBot (Jan 21, 2015)

Sorry for posting this so late, and I apologize if this is considered bumping a dead thread...

I would be one of those rare desktop users you're talking about. The main reason I use FreeBSD, is, surprisingly, the Ports tree (more specifically, the software in it). Every single Linux distro I've tried messes it up in some way: Slackware has a significant number of obscure bugs in some of its packages that I couldn't fix (or rather, I might be able to, but I'm not willing to spend the time on it  ), Debian has _ancient_ stuff (unless you use unstable, and I want some kind of a guarantee of stability on a machine I use everyday...), Fedora and Arch can (and do) break at any time, and Gentoo has probably the most backwards package manager I've ever used (I might be the minority here, but it feels like a Ports system that tries to outsmart you at every turn, and fails every time). FreeBSD's ports are almost always up to date, they contain the stable versions I depend on while not being so old as to be obsolete, and always has the development versions with easy access if I want. On top of that, it's _huge_: I have not yet run into an opensource project that didn't have a Port for itself. It's also rock solid - and I can upgrade continuously, without having to reinstall the whole thing every six months. Lastly, the Linux community has a lot of drama going on over there right now in the desktop part- I don't want to deal with those kinds of petty politics and turbulences. I really don't. It's like dealing with children, honestly...


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 27, 2015)

That's a funny thing, because a lot of ports I try to compile fail. A simple package like Links can be compiled, but something like Firefox is destined to fail.

And indeed, I have learned a lot from the FreeBSD community. It let me fly back to earth when I was raving about Linux


----------



## retrogamer (Jan 27, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> That's a funny thing, because a lot of ports I try to compile fail. A simple package like Links can be compiled, but something like Firefox is destined to fail.


I can't say that I've had any issue compiling Firefox in recent memory; just out of curiosity, would you care to post your /etc/make.conf and also note any non-default build options you selected?


----------



## Megameneer (Jan 27, 2015)

I haven't even heard of that file so I guess it is still in the default state. I don't know what kind of options I had chosen. How can I start over new with building, so I can try if even the defaults do not work?


----------



## retrogamer (Jan 27, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> I haven't even heard of that file so I guess it is still in the default state. I don't know what kind of options I had chosen. How can I start over new with building, so I can try if even the defaults do not work?


Your /etc/make.conf is a config file that is used by make when compiling; it is really important understand what each configuration variable does.  A good guide to get you started is this BSD Now tutorial for a new install - http://www.bsdnow.tv/tutorials/the-desktop You should still take the time to read over the manpage, too - make.conf(5)

You can edit it with any editor, for instance with vim you would just do `vi /etc/make.conf`.

As an example, here is my /etc/make.conf:

```
CC=clang
CXX=clang++
CPUTYPE?=native
CPP=clang-cpp
WRKDIRPREFIX=/tmp
MAKE_JOBS_UNSAFE=yes
WITH_PKGNG=yes
DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES=yes
```
If you're building a desktop by using ports, sooner or later (at least in my experience) you're going to need to tweak /etc/make.conf.  As an example, I needed to set 
	
	



```
DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES=yes
```
 in order to build www/chromium.  If you need to set a variable like that, you will usually find out from the output at the point of failure.  Try building www/firefox again and post the output.


----------



## protocelt (Jan 27, 2015)

retrogamer said:


> If you're building a desktop by using ports, sooner or later (at least in my experience) you're going to need to tweak /etc/make.conf.  As an example, I needed to set
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Just a nitpick. Adding 
	
	



```
DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES=yes
```
 to your /etc/make.conf file is generally bad practice IMHO. You would effectively be disabling vulnerability checks on *all* ports being installed or updated after setting that. Adding that flag directly to make(1) when compiling the specific port affected you wanted to override is a better choice. There are multiple ways to accomplish that. You can of course comment it out after compiling the port, however, if you forget...


----------



## retrogamer (Jan 27, 2015)

protocelt said:


> Just a nitpick. Adding
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Sorry, I should have mentioned that.  I normally just comment it out after compiling www/chromium, I was just trying to give a real use case example of when you would need to tweak your /etc/make.conf to build a common desktop application.

EDIT:  Also, for Megameneer, you would just comment it out by adding a #, as in doing:

```
# DISABLE_VULNERABILITIES=yes
```
protocelt's recommended method of adding the flag only for the individual port is the better way to go, I just use several ports that require that flag and am a bit lazy.


----------



## drhowarddrfine (Jan 28, 2015)

Megameneer said:


> a lot of ports I try to compile fail.


A lot? Except for the occasional hiccup during an upgrade, I've not  had that happen in years; including Firefox.


----------



## sossego (Jan 28, 2015)

You are a forward thinking individual.


----------

