Mastodawn

Y'know what? As an #opensource #advocate and #tech enthusiast, it's genuinely awesome to see increased mainstream coverage of #Linux and #FreeBSD. Unfortunately, a lot of these articles are riddled with mistakes, misinformation, clickbait, and overall low quality. A few minutes ago, while catching up on tech news I came across one #ZDNet author's frequent posts on Linux and FreeBSD.

To emphasize my point, I am only going to focus on one article titled, "After decades on Linux, FreeBSD finally gave me a reason to switch operating systems."

The following passages stuck out like sore thumb:

1.) "FreeBSD is more challenging than Linux."

-But is it really? Subjective, particularly if coming from a GUI-driven Linux distribution. Frankly I find FreeBSD easier because of the excellent documentation and coherent design.

2.) "FreeBSD is Unix-like" but further down he states, "Essentially, FreeBSD is Unix, where Linux is based on Unix."

-Contradictory, incorrect, and confusing for newcomers. FreeBSD is Unix. Linux (neither the kernel nor OS) is based on Unix.

3.) "Think of FreeBSD as a more challenging version of Linux. This operating system doesn't hold your hand, so you might learn a thing or two as you install it and the software you require. Even for a seasoned Linux veteran like me, FreeBSD can often be a head-scratcher."

-Challenging because it's *different than Linux*? FreeBSD doesn't hold your hand? What about #Debian, #Gentoo, #Arch, heck even #RHEL? Since the author didn't mention it, I'm going to assume he did not check the FreeBSD Handbook and his "seasoned Linux" experience has been using a Linux desktop for a couple years. Also, head-scratcher?! Being an experienced Debian user, I'd be scratching my head too if I just decided to use Gentoo on a whim. The trauma of hand-configuring the xorg.conf file was real.

Finally, contrary to the article's title, the author ended up not switching to FreeBSD.

-Clickbait.

I am all for more people exploring FreeBSD and Linux. They are great OSes but it is critical the information being reported is both accurate and consistent. For reference the article is linked below.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/freebsd-linux-review/

After decades on Linux, FreeBSD finally gave me a reason to switch operating systems

FreeBSD isn't Linux, but if you didn't know any better, you'd swear it was.

ZDNET

Show thread

Graham Perrin Feb 22

@peteorrall this was published with a different title, and URL, in December 2025.

The republication is not a bad thing.

When I first read the article by Jack Wallen, I took the time to also read about him, as a person. One of his personal blog posts inspired me to send an email that was entirely unrelated to technology.

When you introduced yourself to BSD Cafe, in May 2025, you reflected upon your many positive interactions with people.

Imagine, now, having a more positive interaction with @jwallen, who might, or might not, read your critique, and the responses (it seems that he has not posted since May 2023).

I encourage other readers to do the same. Be kind.

<https://web.archive.org/web/20251219061844/https:/www.zdnet.com/article/freebsd-will-challenge-your-skills-and-make-you-learn-along-the-way/>

I've used Linux for decades, but I'd switch to FreeBSD for this one feature | ZDNET

Discussion: <https://www.reddit.com/r/freebsd/comments/1pschir/ive_used_linux_for_decades_but_id_switch_to/>

cc @lproven

#FreeBSD

I've used Linux for decades, but I'd switch to FreeBSD for this one feature

FreeBSD isn't Linux, but if you didn't know any better, you'd swear it was.

ZDNET

Show thread

Liam Proven Feb 22

@grahamperrin @peteorrall @jwallen

Somehow you mangled the URL.

I searched the Wayback Machine for the URL on the end and got this:

https://web.archive.org/web/20260126155103/https://www.zdnet.com/web/20260126155103/https:/www.zdnet.com/article/freebsd-will-challenge-your-skills-and-make-you-learn-along-the-way/

TBH, I agree with most of @jwallen's points here.

* FreeBSD _does_ have common roots with real original AT&T Unix©™. All the AT&T code was eventually removed & replaced, so it is Theseus's Unix: no original parts, but it started out made from the same bits.

* FreeBSD _is_ more challenging than almost any Linux. I am not a Linux specialist -- I was installing SCO Xenix in production 3 years _before_ Linus started his project -- but Linux _has_ advanced _far_ more in ease of use than any of the BSDs.

FreeBSD especially so: for example, at least OpenBSD and NetBSD leave you with working X11 and a window manager at the end of a default install. FreeBSD doesn't.

I too am _considering_ switching to FreeBSD. My Intel Mac is getting old, I don't want an Arm one, and soon x86 macOS will start to bitrot.

OTOH a lot of my favourite tools and apps are still missing from BSD. I don't want containers or fancy server stuff, but I very much do want a CUA editor in my console, for instance.

TBH I may well switch to Alpine Linux instead. It's still a Linux, but it feels a bit like one of the 1990s ones: tiny, fast, clean, for the price of being not very friendly…

Show thread

Pete Orrall

@lproven @grahamperrin @jwallen

Liam,

Yes, I *do* agree that Linux has advanced far more than the BSDs. I've experienced this myself since starting both Linux and FreeBSD around the same time, roughly 20 years ago. I will not deny that. However, I find Linux more challenging from the perspective of documentation quality. Admittedly, this has been one of my biggest gripes.

FreeBSD has The Handbook. It's canonical, it's versioned, regularly updated, and considered a core feature. It's also a single, complete OS. But this is not the same for mainstream Linux distros. OTOH, Debian, openSUSE, Arch, and Ubuntu (to name a few) all vary wildly in quality.

Of course, man pages exist but they are just reference. This day in age, tutorials and How-Tos are expected.

Funny you mention containers, due to the documentation problems I've struggled over setting those up but found FreeBSD Jails straightforward and significantly easier.

Show thread

Liam Proven Feb 23

@peteorrall @grahamperrin @jwallen

I hear this a lot. I do not see the benefits myself.

I think the reasons are interrelated.

# The docs

TBH, when I am installing or configuring a new OS, I don't have time to sit and read a manual. (Note: I speak as someone who spent 10% of my full-time working life _writing manuals_.)

When something doesn't work, or I need to know how to do it, I Google it. Small bite-size pages are 10x (or 100x) more use to me than book. The Arch wiki is more use than a handbook _even when I am not using Arch_.

The wealth of Linux info makes it more use than any 1 book.

# The "single complete OS"

Nice idea, but mostly fails in practice. I use Xfce, & Firefox, & Pandoc, & dozens of other FOSS tools. Most work on FreeBSD. They are not part of the "single complete OS", though. That means they mostly aren't in the docs.

The "it's an integrated whole" thing isn't so much an objective fact as it's a viewpoint, that only applies to insiders.

For outsiders, there's no clear line. It's an arbitrary grey zone & what it really feels like is that 75% of the time when you look for help you get told "that's not part of Core, go away."