Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2006 22:44:04 +0800 From: "jan gestre" <freebsd.ph@gmail.com> To: "Jim Stapleton" <stapleton.41@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What FreeBSD users really want Message-ID: <a25afc300607220744s66b23764x2145040eade37c54@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <80f4f2b20607220713g3f25586br1ec34d61ea7a1593@mail.gmail.com> References: <8f0d62060607220403j599c1131xfcfb38e6b18c7c6c@mail.gmail.com> <80f4f2b20607220713g3f25586br1ec34d61ea7a1593@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 7/22/06, Jim Stapleton <stapleton.41@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Every Linux Distributor in the world is hard at work reinventing the > > interface and making the Linux as user friendly as possible but we're > still > > dogged by turn of the century hassle with our FreeBSD. > > > > Here is what I would fix: > > > > 1. Reinvent the installer and interface. > > > > Fundamental thing like system installer is still phenomenally arcane. > There > > is no excuse for FreeBSD developers not to upgrade the system installer > and > > why not using disk imaging technology like Norton ghost or Acronis > > TrueImageinstead of the traditional installation. > > > > > To my experience, especially with application installation, linux has > still yet to approach FreeBSD, let along Windows in this manner. As > for the OS installer, ok, it's not pretty to look at, and it's far > from perfect (fdisk needs a lot of work for one - it has issues with > some hardware, but it's well beyond my skill level to work on sadly). > > As for the disk imaging technology... Do you have _any_ clue about > what goes into installing an OS? To my knowledge, no variant of Linux, > Windows, etc. uses disk imaging technology. There is a very good > reason for this - it doesn't allow for a lot of necessary > customisation without a lot of extra complication in the installer. > > However, while a GUI installer would be nice, as stated to me in a > previous email, a lot of people know this would be useful, but the > manpower required for such a project is immense compared to what is > available from people with the required skills. > > > > 2. Integrate a PHP shell into the core of the system. > > > > PHP is by far the most popular computing language in the world. Why not > > have a shell called PHP shell. So lots of web developers out there can > > easily create shell scripts in PHP syntax to automate and run programs > on > > FreeBSD. > > > > Who wants to learn bash or sh scripting? They are by far the least > popular > > and ugly programming language in the world. > > > > It is astounding that FreeBSD developers have not clued in to the fact > that > > millions of backend webmasters could easily migrate and adopt FreeBSD as > > their O.S of their choice because of PHP. > > No offense, but, it doesn't even integrate BASH. I had to install the > bash package so I wasn't stuck to CSH, and BASH is much more popular > than any PHP shell. (Wait, is there a PHP shell? I know there is a CLI > interpereter, but that's different). Regardless, if it's in ports > (which it probably is if there is such a thing), then just install it, > not very difficult at all. > > Also, PHP is extremely large and slow compared to things like CSH and > BASH. Thus, if only one is being chosen, PHP would be a pretty low > choice: the idea of BSD is to start with something relatively minimal > and build it up to what you need, so you aren't stuck with excess > clutter you don't need, as you often see in most other operating > systems. Integrating such a shell would be very contradictory to this > philosophy, and waste a lot of resources for people who don't want > that waste, or don't have them to spare. > > Also, just because you can't see a reason to use/learn SH doesn't mean > others can't. I knew PHP long before SH, and I still prefer it for a > lot of things, but SH has a lot of important advantages that cannot > easily be chaned (for one, it is almost ubiquitous, except in windows > and Mac OS < X). > > Also, can you actually pull numbers to support your statements about > popularity and lack thereof? There are less popular languages than SH > (which, by the way, is the glue of UNIX), and to be honest, last I > checked, C and Perl were more popular, by far, than PHP. > > > Oh, and I use PHP for my websites and run some on BSD without issue. > All I had to do was take one trivial step after syncing ports, which > is the first thing I do in FreeBSD: > > $ cd /usr/ports/lang/php5 > $ sudo make install clean > > > VIOLA, PHP in no time! > > > > > 3. Content Management Website > > > > Your current website looks very ordinary and doesn't make any impression > for > > anyone visiting your site for the first time. > > Yeah, it's great, I don't have to deal with a lot of crap and clutter > to find what I need. Personally, I think it could be simplified more, > but hey, nothing is perfect. No matter what the website is, it will > always have some people that don't like it. To be honest, I think it's > far enough away from the BSD philosophy as is, and your suggestion > would only move it further. > > To be honest though, the simplicity and lack of crap made an > impression on me and a few that I know, and a good one. Remember, not > everyone is like you, and just because something doesn't appeal to you > doesn't mean it won't appeal to others. > > > > > One thing to remember, I've been in BSD for only about 6-8 months, but > I figured it out pretty quickly: the idea behind BSD is to have a > minimal and functional operating system that allows a user to easily > build up to what he or she needs to do a task effectively. You do have > to put some effort in, but this helps keep machines secure (by not > having unknown and useless [for the user] things on them that could > open vulnerabilities), and keeps the system resources from being > wasted by things that aren't needed. > > > i'm into FreeBSD for only two months and have noticed some very significant things that differs from my previous OS which is debian, it boots faster, it doesn't install things that you don't want, keeping the system minimal. i feel daunted at first when first trying to install it my box but i've gotten over it, it is really very simple. with regards to a graphical install, installing is a one time thing so why the fuss over it, i know it's not very appealing to newbies especially to those people who are used to windoze kinda installer, but there are other FreeBSD based OS like PCBSD and DesktopBSD that uses a graphical install, i think they are good enough for everyday desktop use. as for the website, it doesn't contain any animation to make it more appealing as other would have want, IMO it's a lot better looking than the previous one but hey its just me, different people have different opinions, to some it's good enough and to some not. just my two cents worth :)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?a25afc300607220744s66b23764x2145040eade37c54>