RE: [Fwd: BSDCon 2003 - Call for Papers]

From a previous message:

> >>         * Real world experiences using BSD systems
> >>         * Using BSD in a mixed OS environment
> >>         * Comparison with non-BSD operating systems; technical,
> >>           practical, licensing (GPL vs. BSD)
> >>         * BSD on the desktop

Stacy Olivas:

> I've been thinking about this for a while myself.. 

> If you have been following the discussion in the -advocacy list, you 
> will see that someone just recently posted something about FreeBSD
> being ready for the desktop.  It had a link to an article about Linux.

> Off the top of your head, what is the primary thing that has helped
> Linux in it's push for desktop dominanace?  

> For me, I'd say:

> 1. Easy of installation..  The installers tend to be pretty mindless
> so even the non techie type can install something in a short
> period of time.
> 2. Availability of software/easy to install packages.  While the
> ports collection is fairly easy to use, once you learn it, most
> people don't want to drop to the command line, type make install
> and watch as the program is downloaded and compiled and installed.
> You can use the pre-packaged software, but that requires you to use
> the antiquated sysinstall program (haven't looked at sysinstall2 yet).

> Now, correct me if I am wrong (which I probably am), but those, to me,
> are the two biggest hurdles that the OS will have to overcome before
> it will start attracting the attention of less technical people. 

> I'll ask you this: How many of you ever ask a Linux person if they
> have tried *BSD, and you got a response like:
> "It's too hard to install, it didn't work right out of the box"
> "*BSD, that's a dying OS"
> "*BSD?  What the heck is that?"

On ease of installation, I found Slackware (Linux) easy enough, it's text mode,
not GUI.  Debian (2.2.3?) was also easy enough to install, but messed up when I
accepted the suggestion to install a preselected set of packages, and there were
lots of error messages about conflicts between the packages.  NetBSD 1.5.2 was
easy enough to install, but bugged out when I typed anything in response to the
login prompt, and wouldn't get through the boot in single-user mode with the
generic kernel (OK with installation kernel, otherwise I wouldn't have been able
to install).  I was able to DOSBOOT the NetBSD 1.6 generic kernel in single-user
mode but haven't yet ordered CDs, plan to wait for 1.6.1 since that is nearing
release.  NetBSD sysinstall seemed to automatically newfs all subpartitions of
the NetBSD slice, OK when I was installing 1.5.2 and will install 1.6.1, but not
good if I would want to track -current or upgrade without wiping out the old
version (sometimes an upgrade can break things, this is not limited to BSD).

I tried booting the FreeBSD installation diskettes as a test, but it hung when
probing hardware devices.  OpenBSD has the flaw of not being able to boot on
modern big hard drives when installed above 8 GB, even with modern BIOS; this 
creates problems when one wants to run another OS on the same hard disk.  NetBSD
is balky when booting on some computers where Linux has no problem getting 
through the boot.  Linux also seems to support more hardware devices including
the Fujitsu DynaMO drive and disks with sector size 2048 bytes; I think NetBSD
does not read or write these disks.

I am interested in NetBSD so as to compare the NetBSD and Linux with similar
applications, and to see the differences between two (quasi-)Unixes but am not 
ready to ditch Linux, believe very few disktop computer users would have BSD 
and no other OS.