Myths about FreeBSD

FreeBSD is good for servers, not for desktop PCs

We have a fully functional FreeBSD sound subsystem c low latency, and mixing in the kernel allows multiple applications to play sounds simultaneously (with independent volume settings) without any additional settings. Credit default settings include X.org and desktop settings, such as the GNOME or KDE, it's as simple as select metapackage depending on what you prefer.

Even if it seems too complicated, PC-BSD - a full-featured desktop system created over FreeBSD with an easy to use installer and the option of commercial support.

FreeBSD uses a closed model of development

FreeBSD are developing more than 400 developers around the world, they all have full access to the entire system and data of the OS. Third parties also often fixes native patches. If you want to see the number of bug patches, you can search for 'Submitted by' fixing the logs.

There are no strict limits for FreeBSD. Decisions are made by people willing to do the job. If, however, disputes arise, they are resolved by a group of developers who are elected every two years. Essential criteria for which are elected by the developers is required correction or completion of the project code in the past years.

FreeBSD - Just beautiful OS X without the GUI

This is a myth about OS X, as well as about FreeBSD: OS X just FreeBSD with a nice GUI. These two operating systems do share a part of the code, for example, most of the utilities and user-space C library for OS X derived from FreeBSD versions. Part of the code developed at different times and in different directions, for example FreeBSD 9.1 has included the latest C ++ compiler and stack, which were originally developed for OS X Apple employees. Also, there are fundamentally different parts.

XNU kernel that is used on OS X includes several sub-systems of the older versions of FreeBSD, but it is mainly considered an independent implementation. Nevertheless, due to its similarity products implemented on OS X is much easier to adapt to FreeBSD. For example libdispatch and libc ++ were written for OS X and work on FreeBSD earlier than on any other OS.

In FreeBSD, all you need to compile from source code

The FreeBSD Ports Collection is a very powerful way to install software that allows you to configure settings for a variety of third-party programs and libraries. However, this is not the only way to install the software on FreeBSD. You can always install the software from the binary package. pkgng project added a new package format and package management tools, providing a modern set of tools for binary control.

You can set pkgng of ports (ports-mgmt / pkg) on older versions of FreeBSD. It is enabled by default on FreeBSD 9.1 and later versions.

FreeBSD is a UNIX from the 90th (or 80th)

FreeBSD - linear descendant of the original UNIX via the Berkeley Software Distribution, but it has continued to evolve separately. Over the past few years we have seen that ZFS is much more productive: support 10 GB, 40 GB and 100 GB channel, improved sound system, 802.11n support, and other improvements.

This does not mean that FreeBSD has abandoned its UNIX roots. There are many reasons why UNIX systems have become popular. They include the open-source system that can be easily ported to new platforms, a set of simple tools and core, which has proved itself on different platforms. FreeBSD supports these traditions.

All good code in FreeBSD comes from Solaris

FreeBSD has imported two high-profile features of OpenSolaris: DTrace and ZFS. Both are now well supported by FreeBSD. A ZFS, in particular, is the focus of many FreeBSD developers, including those used iXsystems, a company that supports the development of FreeNAS and sells commercial NAS devices based on FreeBSD. The FreeBSD developers are also working in close cooperation with developers Illumos, one of the branches open source Solaris code to improve both of these functions.

Despite the advantages of ZFS it is still a relatively small part of the overall system. ZFS and DTrace make up less than 4% of the code in the kernel, which is equal to almost 10% of the code in the base system. If we assume that only 0.4% FreeBSD is good, then the system would not have gained such popularity.

FreeBSD does not have drivers

This is a problem faced by all operating systems - even the new version of Windows. Most of the time users do not care about the total number of drivers only if the drivers are already installed by default. There are some shortcomings in terms of driver support, but FreeBSD supports a wide range of network interface cards (including 802.11n chipsets), most sound cards from AMD, Intel and NVIDIA GPUs.

Hardware Support - this is part of the implementation, which requires constant revision, because you can not just say, manufacturers of hardware, so they waited a couple of years, until the developers catch up with their software. Providing support for new devices takes time to adjust, although some manufacturers do offer drivers, such as Nvidia provides drivers for their GPU and Intel for the latest network controllers. Other manufacturers provide assistance in the development of FreeBSD drivers, including Broadcom, JMicron, HP, Mellanox, Chelsio and Solarflare. If you know the devices are not supported by the FreeBSD, better you inform about it to developers and device manufacturers. As a rule, the best stimulus to solve the problem on the part of producers - a message that their customers can not use their products.

FreeBSD 4.x best of everything that was

4.x release was the most stable and FreeBSD were proud that they were able to implement such a product. Many users continue to use it for many years. 5.x series came during the transition to multi-threading optimization. This includes the replacement of the one lock around the nucleus with a number of smaller locks, which are used by individual subsystems. It took a large piece of work, which could not but lead to some errors. 5.x came with two threading implementations, and this further complicates the situation. The first two releases in the 5.x series were marked by "developers only", but 5.2 was aimed at a wider audience and failed to meet expectations FreeBSD users. A number of large users have decided not to change a series of 4.x.

5.x series has been a painful lesson for the project. In a series 6.x release 4.x. restore stability, and 7.x series of restored capacity of one processor. During the 8.x series release can be seen a number of published third party tests have demonstrated the best FreeBSD scalability on multiprocessor systems than any other operating system.

All these releases have a significant number of improvements, such as improved sound system, ZFS, DTrace, keeping UFS logs, and much more, but the stability and performance were key objectives FreeBSD system.

Disadvantages FreeBSD software

FreeBSD collection currently contains more than 26,000 pieces of software. It is difficult to compare this number with other repositories, because the programs are divided differently (eg, GCC port to the FreeBSD installs programs and libraries that are shared between 6-10 packages Debian, it is in the GCC, depending on the version), but most of the things you still you can find there. One of the reasons that users choose FreeBSD is the fact that a specific set of ports provides relatively obscure part of the software, in which it needs, while the other systems do not.

Most of the software in a set of ports working initially on FreeBSD. Most of the open source software - agnostic with respect to the operating system and requires minimal modification was compiled and worked on FreeBSD. There are exceptions such as Valgrind, which require a detailed understanding of the system. Proprietary software can be a serious problem. Some developers, such as of Opera, provide your FreeBSD source code.

Other software should run in emulation mode. For example, Linux binaries can run on Linux the ABI level, where the Linux system calls are transferred to their FreeBSD equivalents. The only flaw - slightly increased loading system calls; usually difficult to measure the difference in performance between the performance of the Linux software on Linux and FreeBSD: in some cases, programs run faster on FreeBSD, Linux than for more effective implementation of the basic challenges. For example, a version of the Linux Flash-plugin can operate using NSPluginWrapper on Linux ABI level with its own web browser.

A similar solution exists to run Windows applications.

FreeBSD does not support virtualization

FreeBSD 9 works as a Xen guest (domU) and x86, and x86-64, including Amazon EC2. Thanks to the work done in conjunction with Microsoft, NetApp and Citrix, FreeBSD can run on Hyper-V hypervisor Microsoft. FreeBSD 11 will include a control domain Dom0 support.

FreeBSD also supports VirtualBox and as a guest and as host. You can find the VirtualBox Guest Additions, and then the hypervisor itself in a set of ports. FreeBSD 10 also works as an operating system for BSD host hypervisor, giving plenty of opportunities to run FreeBSD virtual machines based on FreeBSD.

And finally, if you do not need full virtualization, then to perform isolated FreeBSD userland (or even Linux user space using Linux levels ABI) on a FreeBSD kernel, you can use the subsystem containers. Containers can even provide their own independent network stack, and so on, and so one machine can be used to emulate the whole fleet.

BSD License promotes mutual cooperation

While FreeBSD code, developers will not submit to you a claim of copyright infringement, you can use it freely. But according to the developers themselves, this will not happen.

Some companies will almost certainly take our code, change it and had nothing to give in return.

Consider as an example the case of the two largest Internet companies: Google and Yahoo! before their internal infrastructure based on GPL operating system, while later versions have been using FreeBSD. Since Google does not distribute their modified the operating system, they can save for example GoogleFS privately owned. In such cases as this, where the software developed for internal use, under a license agreement the company is not obliged to reveal their improvements to FreeBSD developers.

There are, however, some problems with the connection, for example, the library can not be used with the GPL, if you already use BSD.

Over the years, quite a few companies made a significant contribution to FreeBSD. And the reason for this is not only a sense of altruism, because support for any project that is developing rapidly, it is very expensive.