Free BDS on Linux?
Moderator: General Moderators
Free BDS on Linux?
A friend of mine told be about Free BDS and that it goes "on" linux....? I've never used linux before and would like to give it a try.
FreeBSD ( http://www.freebsd.org/ ) not BDS 
"It is derived from BSD, the version of UNIX® developed at the University of California, Berkeley."
It doesn't go 'on' linux, it's a Unix 'variant' sorta like linux is.
"It is derived from BSD, the version of UNIX® developed at the University of California, Berkeley."
It doesn't go 'on' linux, it's a Unix 'variant' sorta like linux is.
-
Straterra
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:46 am
- Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
- Contact:
There is no distrobution labeled "Linux." There are many. Go to http://www.linuxiso.org. You should try most of them out, starting with Red Hat and Mandrake, and ending with Gentoo. Find you what is your favorite. The best thing about "Linux" is open source. You can truly customize your machine in ways that M$ never can.
-
malcolmboston
- DevNet Resident
- Posts: 1826
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 1:09 pm
- Location: Middlesbrough, UK
and you have to use usually inferior software........
and <span style='color:blue' title='I'm naughty, are you naughty?'>smurf</span> about with <span style='color:blue' title='I'm naughty, are you naughty?'>smurf</span> that shouldnt be there.............
have a much more complex (and error ridden OS).............
and compile your own software in most cases...................
no longer run most windows programs (Wine Sux)..................
cant go into a store and buy software off the shelf....................
have to put up with ignorant M$ haters who dont realise taht without them PC's would'nt be anywhere near as good...........
no longer use dreamweaver or zend.....................
have to put up with stupid file permissions................
constantly update the kernel........................
etc etc etc
.....diss windows and ill point out the 20,000,000 problems my linux box has (RH9) and exactly why i use win2003 server and not linux
and <span style='color:blue' title='I'm naughty, are you naughty?'>smurf</span> about with <span style='color:blue' title='I'm naughty, are you naughty?'>smurf</span> that shouldnt be there.............
have a much more complex (and error ridden OS).............
and compile your own software in most cases...................
no longer run most windows programs (Wine Sux)..................
cant go into a store and buy software off the shelf....................
have to put up with ignorant M$ haters who dont realise taht without them PC's would'nt be anywhere near as good...........
no longer use dreamweaver or zend.....................
have to put up with stupid file permissions................
constantly update the kernel........................
etc etc etc
.....diss windows and ill point out the 20,000,000 problems my linux box has (RH9) and exactly why i use win2003 server and not linux
-
malcolmboston
- DevNet Resident
- Posts: 1826
- Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 1:09 pm
- Location: Middlesbrough, UK
tbh, i have no idea why people hate microsoft so much, personally i think that people dont like things that are successful its a fact of life, but microsoft are successful for a reason, they're the best @ what they do
People 'supposedly' like linux because its open source, and? i payed £40 ($60-$70) for my RH9 (boxed) instead of getting it freely from the net, after hearing how good it was for web servers and servers in general, so i thought fantastic, ill run out to the shop and put it on my box and made the awful mistake of replacing windows 2000 Pro (a better OS) with RH9
currently i have
- Windows 2003 Server
- Windows XP Professional
- Windows 2000 Professional
- Windows 2000 Server
- Redhat 9.0 (Shrike)
- Gentoo
- Peanut
Without doubt in my opinion anyway, the aforementioned windows OS are better than linux distro's in pretty much everyway
admittedly one of the key reasons for using linux was that it was supposed to be really fast even with X windows enabled, let me tell you something right now, even windows XP (a power hungry OS) runs faster on my 2.6ghz machine, RH9 takes around 10 seconds to simply open a directory after clicking on it and this is after a full installation with no extra's on top, getting an application to run and faster is beyond a joke, fine i have all the graphical details switched on but 10 seconds...............
ok, software on linux is pretty good admittedly, Kate is a top program, but i only use it for PHP, GIMP sucks imo (photoshop > Paintshop > Gimp) so the only reason i ever switch on linux is to use kate but why bother when i have full version of zend development center?
however it is my personal opinion that linux software never feels finished with the notable exception of a few good pieces of software, bugs here and there, but standard features you take for granted missing, and the names of the programs jeez what the hells that all about!?
Personally i have yet to see a good argument on this debate that i am unable to rip apart in seconds.
Also people say Microsoft is bug ridden, look at the RH kernel ffs, and i read somewhere recently that windows 2000 (less complex than latter OS's is estimated to have 30m lines of code, if you created a PHP file (lot less complex, shouldnt even really be comparing) that was 30m lines of code how many bugs do you think would be in it
atm im currently using windows 2003 server and havent turned linux on in approx 2-3 weeks
just my $.0.02
People 'supposedly' like linux because its open source, and? i payed £40 ($60-$70) for my RH9 (boxed) instead of getting it freely from the net, after hearing how good it was for web servers and servers in general, so i thought fantastic, ill run out to the shop and put it on my box and made the awful mistake of replacing windows 2000 Pro (a better OS) with RH9
currently i have
- Windows 2003 Server
- Windows XP Professional
- Windows 2000 Professional
- Windows 2000 Server
- Redhat 9.0 (Shrike)
- Gentoo
- Peanut
Without doubt in my opinion anyway, the aforementioned windows OS are better than linux distro's in pretty much everyway
admittedly one of the key reasons for using linux was that it was supposed to be really fast even with X windows enabled, let me tell you something right now, even windows XP (a power hungry OS) runs faster on my 2.6ghz machine, RH9 takes around 10 seconds to simply open a directory after clicking on it and this is after a full installation with no extra's on top, getting an application to run and faster is beyond a joke, fine i have all the graphical details switched on but 10 seconds...............
ok, software on linux is pretty good admittedly, Kate is a top program, but i only use it for PHP, GIMP sucks imo (photoshop > Paintshop > Gimp) so the only reason i ever switch on linux is to use kate but why bother when i have full version of zend development center?
however it is my personal opinion that linux software never feels finished with the notable exception of a few good pieces of software, bugs here and there, but standard features you take for granted missing, and the names of the programs jeez what the hells that all about!?
Personally i have yet to see a good argument on this debate that i am unable to rip apart in seconds.
Also people say Microsoft is bug ridden, look at the RH kernel ffs, and i read somewhere recently that windows 2000 (less complex than latter OS's is estimated to have 30m lines of code, if you created a PHP file (lot less complex, shouldnt even really be comparing) that was 30m lines of code how many bugs do you think would be in it
atm im currently using windows 2003 server and havent turned linux on in approx 2-3 weeks
just my $.0.02
- twigletmac
- Her Royal Site Adminness
- Posts: 5371
- Joined: Tue Apr 23, 2002 2:21 am
- Location: Essex, UK
malcomboston -
Nobody except you is trying to make this a MS vs. OSS argument. Someone said Linux is more customisable than Windows which it is and that's it.
Pyrite got it right - the right OS for the right person for the right job.
You have tried RH9, that is not Linux in it's entirity, please leave this thread alone, it's about FreeBSD anyway.
Mac
Nobody except you is trying to make this a MS vs. OSS argument. Someone said Linux is more customisable than Windows which it is and that's it.
Pyrite got it right - the right OS for the right person for the right job.
You have tried RH9, that is not Linux in it's entirity, please leave this thread alone, it's about FreeBSD anyway.
Mac
-
Straterra
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:46 am
- Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
- Contact:
Dude! All I ever said was that Linux was more customizable...IMHO, Linux is tons more stable than any Micr$soft product. My custom-kernal (Slackware) runs faster than any other M$ distribution I have ever tried. My Celeron 500 runs Mandrake 9.2 HELLA faster than XP....
Last edited by Straterra on Tue Mar 09, 2004 8:49 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Straterra
- Forum Regular
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:46 am
- Location: Indianapolis, Indiana
- Contact:
Who said anything about M$ hating? Also, RH9 is a very crappy distribution, IMHO. It is NOT suitable for a server..Distro's such as Slackware or Gentoo are optimal for running servers. Red Had 9 is only good, IMHO, for running desktops...much like Windows 98SE.malcolmboston wrote:and you have to use usually inferior software........
and f**k about with <span style='color:blue' title='I'm naughty, are you naughty?'>smurf</span> that shouldnt be there.............
have a much more complex (and error ridden OS).............
and compile your own software in most cases...................
no longer run most windows programs (Wine Sux)..................
cant go into a store and buy software off the shelf....................
have to put up with ignorant M$ haters who dont realise taht without them PC's would'nt be anywhere near as good...........
no longer use dreamweaver or zend.....................
have to put up with stupid file permissions................
constantly update the kernel........................
etc etc etc
.....diss windows and ill point out the 20,000,000 problems my linux box has (RH9) and exactly why i use win2003 server and not linux