How do you decide if an OS is better than another one? It may be better for you but it can't be objectively better.
Secondly, FreeBSD is owned and maintained mainly by the FreeBSD Foundation, which is not a company AFAIK but it receives contributions/commits from Netflix, just as Microsoft and other companies do with Linux. So it's not "everything controlled by a company in a monolithic manner".
Finally, you don't need to fork, FreeBSD already provides you what you need and all the things integrate very good with each other, because they are not different projects but only one. And FYI there isn't just FreeBSD, but many *BSD operating systems so you can choose basing on your needs.
My final thought is that too much modularity may lead to an unstable system (since every person or group cares about its own project and cannot care about all the other existing ones) so things may break more often. Another big disadvantage of some famous and nice Linux distros is Systemd.
Other than all what I've wrote, Linux is a pretty good kernel.
Guys, why are we not getting over BSD talk
0- being open and accessible for fix and improvements and being fixed almost weekly without denying mistakes shows which software is better. 1- closed company, group, colony, whatever. 2- nobody can predict others requirements better than themselves. 3- your imaginations about modularity is wrong. each program works exactly the way which dependencies are designed otherwise it going to be statically or self contained dynamically linked. devs and maintainers are responsible for syncing their products with dependencies and users won't push forward blindly. what if i don't want the bloats of bsd 👉operating system👈 but i want a modular kernel to be able to compile it based on requirements of the context and put other hand picked uncentralized modules on top of it and modify stuffs? what if i don't like the design of some parts of this operating system? will they obey my requested rules? i won't accept monolithic systems anymore.
Обсуждают сегодня