Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 02 May 2001 15:14:42 -0700
From:      "Charles Burns" <burnscharlesn@hotmail.com>
To:        etalent@bizjournals.com, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: What is BSD (My best try)
Message-ID:  <F211FfhWVz6g6m8XFlx0000121f@hotmail.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
/************
Well my question is just a general one I was wondering if you could
explain in laymans terms (someone who is familar enough to keep simple
office tasks and other programs running on a Windows based computer and
knows how to munipulate files in DOS) what BSD is and how it works?
Also any tips you can give me on what Linux is, (besides the "someone
created it based off the concept of Unix so it could be more afforadble
than Unix which is so great" line) would be appriciated.
**************/

That is a big question, Ember. I'll do my best:

This will be a little long, but I will try to keep it interesting. If a 
certain part is confusing, it will hopefully be explained later in this 
email.

First, "BSD" stands for "Berkeley Software Distribution". Very early 
versions of what BSD is based on were written largely by UC Berkeley 
students, including Bill Joy, one of the important people at Sun 
Microsystems.

I think that you are more asking "What is Unix", which in one way or another 
is the same as "What is BSD" or "What is Linux"

Some of the following info will be somewhat simplified or generalized for 
the sake of understanding because many details just aren't that important. I 
hope this helps.

If I get too technical or too simple, please let me know and I will try 
again. Others may offer a better explanation of certain parts.

Ok. Hmmmmm....

Windows 2000 is an operating system.

MacOS is an operating system.

What makes these things operating systems is that they provide a software 
layer that is somewhere in-between the computer hardware itself (CPU, 
memory) and your applications, like Microsoft Office or Freecell.

The actual definition of "Operating system" is open to some debate, but in 
general you can say that an operating system like Windows or MacOS sets the 
standards for the interface to the computer, sets the standards for the 
interface to the programmer, and to a degree limits what a computer can do.

Operating systems (OS's for short) set the standards for the user 
interface--i.e. what you click on or type, when you click or type, and what 
those things actually do. In Windows, one way to delete a directory that 
contains files and other directories is to use Explorer and browse to that 
directory, highlight it, hit the "delete" key, say "Yes, move this to the 
recycle bit" (or whatever it asks), Click on the recycle bin, click "Empty 
recycle bin", click "Yes, I am sure" (or whatever), and it is done.
In DOS, you would type "deltree c:\path\to\directory" and then hit "y" (for 
Yes) when it asks if you are sure.
In Unix, one of the many ways to do this is to type "rm -rf /path/directory"

That was a simple example, but it demonstrates what I meant by user 
interface. Note that there are many graphical (point-and-click) interfaces 
available for Unix, for free, that many including myself believe look much 
cooler than Windows. (Take a look at www.themes.org)

OS's also provide the interface for the programmer to do things with the 
system. For example, if you want to make a window using Windows, the 
programmer has to ask Windows to make it for him. Some things can be done 
without any help, some things require that the operating system is asked to 
do it.

Unix, too, is an operating system. Unix has a command-line interface (One 
that you type into, like DOS, sort of) and a graphical interface, like 
Windows. Actually, there are many command-line and graphical interfaces to 
choose from and customize, but for the purposes of simplicity we'll ignore 
technicalities.

-------------Advantages/disadvantages-------------
Each operating system has advantages and disadvantages, just like different 
cars or houses.

Windows 98, for example, has some advantages over all other operating 
systems. (Actually Windows 98 is often considered a complex DOS program, not 
an OS, but for our purposes it is an OS)
Iwill illustrate advatages/disadvantages of Windows so that I can compare it 
to Unix.

Windows 98 is very popular. Windows, as a whole, has been used by over 90% 
of computer users in the world.

Windows 98 has support for almost all current hardware. When companies make 
a new piece of hardware, Windows is on the top of the list to support 
because of the above reason.

Windows 98 is familiar to most computer users.

Windows 98 has the most commercial applications available for it of any 
operating system.

Windows is easy to install.

Windows hides much of the technical information about your computer, thus 
reducing the power of the operating system but making it easier to use. 
(Less options = less confusion)

---These are pretty hefty. How about it's disadvantages?

Windows 98 is not stable. People cannot trust Windows 98 to not crash when 
they are doing someting important, like writing a program or typing the last 
chapter of a novel. Windows is famous for "Blue Screens of Death" (BSOD's) 
because it is one of the least stable operating systems in use today. I 
often use the analogy that Windows 98 is abotu as stable as a Jello(tm) 
skyscraper.

Windows 98 is expensive, as are its applications. A new Windows license 
costs around $200, and the common applications such as Office, Visio, 
Winzip, Visual Studio, Norton System Works, etc. can often total far more 
than the cost of the hardware.

The popular applications for Windows are often slow, buggy, and of a low 
quality. Norton SpeedDisk has been known to destroy hard drive partitions 
(This has happened to me); Visual Studio can often crash or produce buggy 
programs from good source code (look at the list of hundreds of bug fixes in 
one of its huge service packs that you have to download); Microsoft Office 
is, in my humble opinion, the most flaky and infuriating suite of software 
ever devised. It so often tries to do what it thinks I want, is always 
wrong, and forces me to go back and fix its screw-ups which interrupts my 
work.
Why, when I have a 2-level bulleted list, does all of the text below the 
bulleted list suddenly shrink by 3 font sizes when I hit enter? Things like 
this are common and the irritating paperclip is utterly useless when asked 
things like "How do I make office stop second guessing everything that I 
do?"

Windows is designed poorly which leads to difficulty programming (=higher 
software costs), slower application response (=faster, more expensive 
hardware needed), and several other bad things that Microsoft does their 
best to cover up as fixing would require all but a total rewrite.

The source code to Windows is not available. While this may seem like it 
doesn't matter to people who won't be using it (like me), it does matter in 
that Microsoft has only so many people that can find security holes and bugs 
in the program code. Free Unix operating systems like FreeBSD and Linux come 
with the source code so that billions of people can look at it and help fix 
any problems that might occur.

The Windows filesystem is slow, unreliable, fragments easily (gets slower 
over time), wastes lots of disk space if you have many small files, and 
limits the size of your hard drive partitions (letters) to relatively small 
sizes.

Most of the problems aren't directly noticed by people until they try 
something better designed than Windows because it is thought that the 
Windows way is the only way. I use both Windows and Unix and frequently 
notice new reasons why Unix is designed better. So, so, much better.

Windows comes with almost no software, and the software that it does come 
with is VERY limited. Have you ever tried to write a complex document in 
Wordpad? Have you ever tried to do anything but very simple graphics in MS 
Paint? Have you ever tried to make a serious database with MS Access, which 
doesn't even come with Windows?


--------Unix advantages and disadvantages. Emphasis on FreeBSD because this 
is a FreeBSD mailing list--------
Assume that when I say FreeBSD, that in general (though not necessarily) I 
also mean Linux.

FreeBSD as well as many other Unices are free. No charge. Period.

FreeBSD is rock-solid stable. It NEVER crashes. For one example, check out 
NetCraft's "Top 50 server uptimes" at 
"http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html"
This is a list of the 50 servers on the Internet that have been up (Haven't 
crashed or been rebooted) for the longest. Notice the complete lack of 
Windows systems here?
There are FreeBSD systems that have been running continuously for more than 
three years without so much as a hiccup.

Unix software is generally of a higher quality than Windows software (and 
it's free). When a Microsoft employee writes a piece of a program, only the 
word "Microsoft" is attached to it. When somebody writes a free Unix program 
and releases the source code, his name and personal reputation are attached 
to it. If that person made a crappy program--One that crashes or uses an 
excessive amount of memory or other resources--that is a personal 
embarrassment to that programmer's skills. Thus, generally the only 
programmers that often write software for Unix are ones that know exactly 
what they are doing.
What about Microsoft programmers? Don't they know what they are doing? Ask 
yourself this next time Windows crashes.
In addition, because the source code has been made public, anybody can 
improve it. When an improvement is made, it is generally added to the 
official distribution of that program. Many popular Unix programs have been 
around for many years and are asymptotically approaching perfection. FreeBSD 
is a good example of this. FreeBSD is considered by many who know what they 
are talking about to be the highest quality most consistant operating system 
available for the PC, regardless of any disadvantages that it may have.

FreeBSD is very similar to other Unixes. Once you learn FreeBSD, you will 
feel right at home with Solaris, Linux, or any number of other popular 
Unices. You will, of course, have to make some minor adjustments but for hte 
most part anything you learn on one can be applied in one way or another to 
a different Unix.
Windows, on the other hand, is similar only to Windows.

FreeBSD doesn't hide any technical information or capabilities of your 
computer. While you don't need to know every little detail about your system 
to use FreeBSD, every little capability of the system is there if you want 
to use it.
I am frequently amazed at how much can be done with Unix that you simply 
cannot do with Windows without writing your own program just to do that 
specific task. Very time consuming.

FreeBSD comes with absolutely insane amounts of software that will do just 
about anything that you will ever need to do.
And it is all free. And very high quality.
Do you want to do advanced graphics editing? Use The GIMp. Do you want to 
edit a text file with an editor that is more powerful than any human could 
possibly ever describe? Use Emacs or Vi. (There are hundreds of tohers 
available too)
Want to have a full office suite? Free? The most popular are StarOffice and 
KOffice. Neither has a talking paperclip.
Want to run a website? Every Unix comes with Apache, the webserver that is 
more popular than all other webservers combined.
Database? You have the choice of MySQL, PostGreSQL, Berkeley database, and 
many others. Free. Want more power? Oracle can run on FreeBSD.
At last count, there are about 6,000 separate applications that are 
available on FreeBSD that you can install with just an internet connection 
and the FreeBSD CD. These aren't all installed by default, of course. You 
need to install many of them yourself. This is a matter of finding the 
program that you want and typing:
"make"
"make install"
And you're done.

FreeBSD is designed well. It is MUCH faster, MUCH most stable, more secure, 
more powerful and more programmer-friendly than Windows. If you find anybody 
that can argue these points, point him to this mailing list (as long as he 
actually knows what he is talking about and doesn't just want to insult 
people). We will set him straight. ;-)

The FreeBSD filesystem is efficient, doesn't need to be defragmented 
(doesn't slow down significantly over time), won't every corrupt data if the 
computer loses power if set up right, doesn't waste lots of space, and is 
far faster than the Windows 98 filesystems.

Unix can run most Windows software. Some doens;t run perfectly, but Unix has 
several ways of doing this. Windows cannot run Unix software without 
expensive and slow 3rd party applications that eleminate any advantages of 
doing so most of the time.

Unix is about choice. If you don't like something about it, you can change 
it. If you don't like the program that you are using for any given task, 
chances are you have a choice of dezens of others. Don't like the shape of 
your window? Use a new theme or make your own. Don't like the name of one of 
the commands? Rename it. Want to have a file in multiple directories but 
take disk space only once? No problem. There is so much choice that it is 
almost overwhelming sometimes. That's when you ask around for 
recommendations on places like this mailing list. ;-)

--Disadvantages---

FreeBSD and Unix in general is less popular than Windows. Certain specific 
commercial applications that aren't available on Unix and don't run under 
Unix have no free equivalent--like the 3D modelling program 3D Studio Max 
and the professional sound editing package, Soundforge.

More people are unfamiliar with Unix than are familiar with it.

Unix insists that you know more about your computer than you need to know 
under Windows.

Unix doesn't support certain pieces of hardware that Windows does, such as 
most cheap Winmodems, some exotinc printers, the 3D capabilities of many 
video cards, and a few other things such as some sound cards. In general, 
the hardware support of Windows is greater than that of Unix.

Unix is generally not as good for a desktop operating system as Windows is. 
Desktop oerating systems liek Windows typically put ease of use above 
stability, power, speed, and design. Server operating systems generally have 
opposite priorities.

/**********
>I currently sell classified advertising space in the Portland Business 
>Journal and one of my three catergories is technology.  I know a lot about 
>it but not enough I find as my clients leave me in the dust when discussing 
>these things with me.
*********/

If you need any further help feel free to ask. I would recommend that you 
give Unix a try. I would start out with SuSE Linux or Mandrake.
(www.suse.com and www.mandrake.com respectively)
You can try freeBSD as well, but it is best for people that are already 
somewhat familiar with the way that Unix works. Diving head first into 
FreeBSD can be quite alienating because it is so utterly different from 
Windows.

-------------
>We've teamed up with MICROSOFT to deliver even
>more in-depth news and services for business owners--

Woohoo. Take everything that they say about Windows and Unix with a grain of 
salt. Remember, Microsoft is run by marketing people--and we all know how 
trustworthy people are when money is involved. ;-)

Good luck. If you've actually read this far I commend your patience and 
persistance. Looking back, this probably wasn't terribly interesting.

Charles Burns
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?F211FfhWVz6g6m8XFlx0000121f>