• Solaris1789@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Unbreakably stable, cohesive (no need to fit and manage tens of different pieces to get a get a functionning OS), performant, bhyve, BSD licensed (can be a pro or con tho). It has quite a lot of stuff that makes it worthy of Linux or other BSDs.

      EDIT: Almost forgot ZFS.

      • dinckel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        1 year ago

        Not to mention that generations of Playstation and Nintendo consoles run on top of their work, and Apple’s macOS also has deep roots into the BSD history

    • quat@lemmy.sdfeu.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s an old saying: “Linux users use Linux because they hate Windows. BSD users use BSD because they love Unix.” Obviously this is not true for every individual user, but I think it describes a trend or pattern.

    • djsaskdja@endlesstalk.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Much smaller footprint than Linux. If you’re running a server, it’s much less vulnerable to malicious exploits.

      • Billegh@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, BSD is now in the situation that Linux was in the early 00s. Smaller, faster, and more reliable than the “other guy”.

        Faster and more reliable are far closer for BSD and Linux than Linux and Windows, but now it seems that BSD is possibly there.

    • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      FreeBSD is the tool you don’t know you need, and then suddenly there’s the perfect use case, because those BSD alchemists never get tired of tinkering on it and suddenly BSD overtake Linux or Windows in some areas. You think Linux is everywhere, same with BSD its just better at hiding.

      • mbw@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        and then suddenly there’s the perfect use case

        Yeah but like WHAT?

        • Square Singer@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Like when you want to have a fully-fledged OS that you can rebrand, close the source and sell as your invention.

        • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          The NAS community seems to have standardized on BSD for reasons outside of my understanding. If you’re looking to roll your own NAS you might end up with BSD rather than Linux.

          • nxdefiant@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            ZFS is baked in by default and the os is rock solid stable. It follows the same philosophy as Debian really, only the most tried and tested code makes it into the os.

        • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          How can I know? it’s something people need to research when they choose OS for their projects.

      • On@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        BSD overtake Linux or Windows in some areas

        Any examples? besides the well known security, lower footprint and simplicity. genuinely curious.

    • Scott@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve ran a freebsd based version of TrueNas on consumer hardware for well over 400 days straight. It’s the most stable system I’ve ever run.