OpenBSD on the desktop: Why?
Why a desktop installation of OpenBSD?
It's a legitimate question. According to Distrowatch, among the three main BSD projects (they don't like to be called "distros"), FreeBSD is way out in front -- and is the base for PC-BSD and DesktopBSD -- followed by OpenBSD and NetBSD.
And even though there are two desktop-focused versions of FreeBSD, and it's possible to turn all three of the major BSD projects into a desktop-worthy system, the question remains: Why not just stick with Linux, with its usually superior hardware detection, vastly larger community of users (who in theory and often in practice can provide all the help you need to get a system up and running) and much larger choice of distributions?
For one thing, Linux isn't alone on the desktop, nor should it be. Apple has a hugely popular desktop operating system based in part on code from BSD. And another operating system derived from Unix -- OpenSolaris -- is also inching onto the desktop with its Indiana project.
I think the competition is enormously healthy for free, open-source software, and I support that competition and choice wholeheartedly.
And using OpenBSD to build up a desktop system is just plain fun. It's more of a challenge, and all the configuration that I've done and am doing just teaches me more about what makes operating systems tick, even in my technologically feeble state.
I'm no coder. I've never programmed anything. I just mess around with hardware and software and then write about it.
I'm pretty much compelled to do all the things I've done over the past year and a half. It hasn't gotten boring.
And while I'm not going to move away from Linux, if the hardware and software cooperate -- as they have on this test machine -- I see no reason not to spend some considerable time running OpenBSD and seeing what I can do with it.
Again, my thanks go to all the people behind OpenBSD as well as the bloggers whose experience has paved the way for me to consider running the operating system and then to install and begin configuring it.
Going forward, I hope all of the major BSD projects -- FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD -- will continue to grow, keeping their documentation of the same ultra-high quality and enabling users to get more and more hardware working to the point where both server and desktop users have a greater number of choices than ever with which to get things done.
2 Comments
Leave a comment
About this blog
The BSD operating systems dislike being called distros for two reasons, the association with Linux distributions, and the fact that they are put together differently than Linux distributions.
The core point against the use of distro is that the BSDs are all independent operating systems, they are entirely seperate code bases, where as the Linux-based systems all draw from the same base set of tools and they are not held together in one cohesive form.
Nice article
OpenBSD makes a great, very stable and secure, no-thrills desktop environment. Properly configured it is very efficient and customisable. It is worth compiling a custom kernel to best suit your hardware, omitting unnecessary devices.
I've loved my experience with this superb operating system, building a complete desktop / workstation as well as web, mail and database servers from it. It makes a great firewall with the native pf packet filter.
Part of it's strong security comes from simplicity. It is based on common sense, which makes it a joy to learn. Successfully building apps from source becomes a source of satisfaction once you learn how to sort out dependencies and make a build first time. I'm a big fan of OpenBSD, does it show?