Refresher Course: The Free Unix Desktop
I have been using a Mac at home since 2002. Prior to that I had been a big NeXT guy, and my home network always consisted of a mix of OPENSTEP and FreeBSD boxes, with the occasional partition devoted to Windows for gaming.
My hosting costs just skyrocketed after a friend and I decided to share a dedicated server. The money that I had earmarked for a new Macbook Pro didn’t make much sense when my web site profits had just been reduced so drastically. Eventually the site will make enough that I don’t miss it, but I feel it now, and my web site profits also have to cover expenses for trips to trade shows that I cover for my site.
I started to consider just buying an inexpensive PC laptop, since all I was going to use it for was web publishing, light graphics work, web browsing and email. I figured after I played with Vista for a week, I would wipe the drive clean and install an operating system I could stomach. So, after a five year absence, I caught up on what’s changed on the free unix desktop. Here are some observations from an old unix geek that’s been away for awhile:
The horizon has changed substantially in the time I’ve been away. Back in the mid 90’s, for linux there was Redhat, Slackware, Debian, SuSE and a bunch of smaller distros. After them came a whole slew of Redhat and Debian based distros, and some brand new ones as well. Mandrake got big for a while. Yellow Dog was just about your only option if you had Power PC based hardware. I ran Brazilian distro Conectiva for a bit and thought it was very polished, but I spent most of my linux time on SuSE.
On the BSD side there was FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD. OpenBSD strove for security, NetBSD for portability and FreeBSD for stability and compatibility. By compatibility I mean that FreeBSD has a very large ports system that gives FreeBSD users access to a wealth of software that will compile natively in FreeBSD. On top of that, FreeBSD has a linux binary compatibility layer, which means that if there isn’t a FreeBSD-native version of an application you want to use, you may likely be able to run the linux version. Outside of a few new FreeBSD based operating systems showing up (Dragonfly BSD, PC-BSD and Apple’s Mac OS X*), the BSDs haven’t changed a lot. They still offer secure, stable systems that don’t eat up a lot of resources to run. While FreeBSD’s popularity hasn’t grown as much as linux has enjoyed these last few years, it remains a favorite operating system for web servers because of it’s stability and low ram requirements.
*(Mac OS X relies on FreeBSD for a lot of it’s unix core, Darwin. However, OS X uses the Mach kernel instead of FreeBSD’s kernel, and there is so much proprietary code in OS X that it isn’t 100% correct to lump it in with operating systems that are more dependent on FreeBSD.)
In contrast, the linux landscape has really expanded. There are lots of new distros. Lots of distros based on old favorites, lots of entirely new distros and lots of distros based on what are new distros to me. I’ll just cut this short and say that there are a lot of choices if you’re interested in linux.
So after playing with Vista for a few days, and a few days was all it took to see what a bloated, nearly unusable pig it was, I wiped the hard drive clean in my new laptop. In Vista’s defense, it is far and away the best looking Windows you’ve ever used. They just really messed up every other aspect of it. 600 megs of ram in use after a cold boot with no applications or system utilities running is not the way to win my heart, Microsoft.
My first move was to download the latest .iso release of a Gentoo-based linux distro I had read a little about, Sabayon. I hadn’t run linux in quite some time, and while I leaned toward FreeBSD if possible, I thought my best shot of hardware support in terms of the new laptop may be linux, so I went that way first.
My initial impression of seeing Sabayon after it booted off the live DVD is that I wanted to run it. This was a gorgeous, hardware accelerated desktop that needed to make no excuses to people coming over from OS X or Vista. Sabayon defaults to your choice of Gnome or KDE desktop environments in conjunction with Compiz, software which adds 3D acceleration to the desktop and replaces the default window manager. After playing with Sabayon for a couple of days I was finished and ready to move on to familiar FreeBSD. Linux kernel support for my wireless adapter is not quite ready for prime time, and Sabayon has an issue with Intel graphics adapters based on the Intel 965 chipset. I give Sabayon a release, maybe two more, and I am going to check them out again. I was so impressed with it that I would like to run it, when it’s ready for my hardware.
I downloaded FreeBSD 7.0RC2. Normally I don’t run release candidates, but 7.0 is the first release that offers a dedicated driver for my wireless adapter. Install is exactly the same as it was when I installed FreeBSD for the very first time, back in 1996, which was strangely comforting in addition to being very familiar.
FreeBSD installed without a hitch, and also required no configuration of X on my part. It just worked. The only real issue I have run into is that DHCP is not establishing a connection if I have WEP enabled, but with no encryption the network adapter is flawless. I understand that WPA works better in FreeBSD, but one of the two wireless routers that I will use with this laptop does not support WPA, even with a firmware upgrade. I live in a rural area, so I’m not worried about strangers hopping on my network, but if I lived in a big city this would be an issue.
I am running KDE 3.5.8, which sure has come a long way from KDE 1. Honestly I never used to be a fan of KDE or Gnome, but my requirements for creature comforts are greater than they were last time I was using X. I found KDE to be the best choice because it features applets that reside in the panel (think Windows taskbar) that allow me to keep tabs on battery usage, wireless networking (linux-only at this time) and a driver interface for my Synaptics touchpad, giving me the same functionality with my touchpad that I would enjoy in Windows. That is an unexpected surprise, and a welcome one. Full blown gui desktop running KDE with Firefox, an email browser and a couple of terminals running-150 megs of ram used. I won’t be in such a hurry to replace the gig of ram in my laptop with 2 gigs running FreeBSD.
I installed Compiz and am going to try to configure X to look as sexy as the Sabayon system I played with, but I need to read a little more on setting up X first. It’s changed somewhat since the last time I had an Xwindows system.
I always had a linux or FreeBSD box around, but always used OPENSTEP as my primary workstation. The Xwindows environment was just too unfinished in my opinion, and a decent looking X desktop required the user to hand configure it to get it that way. Things have change a lot in the last five years and KDE is a lot closer to providing the things you expect from your desktop than it was. So is Gnome, just not to the extent that KDE has become more polished.
As much as I am impressed with how much better the X desktop has become, I am even more impressed that my hardware was supported so well. I figured a new laptop would be problematic, and it just wasn’t the case. Back in the day you built a box with hardware in mind if you wanted sound, 3D graphics and networking on a free unix, and I fully expected to make some sacrifices to run FreeBSD or linux on the new laptop. At least on FreeBSD that has not been the case, and I was able to achieve my goal: get rid of Vista and not feel like I was giving up any functionality or creature comforts in doing so.
Bookmark & Share
Comment by Phil Benwell on 27 February 2008:
I’ve always used Widows but last year decided to try out Ubuntu, I like the interface but could not get my wireless adapter working so unfortunately have reverted back to Windows.
Comment by Nish on 28 February 2008:
I have been working with UNIX for over 6 years and personally, I wouldn’t use UNIX on a Desktop cos of Driver issues and so on… Having said that, UNIX is still my #1 choice when it comes to servers and EXPECIALLY Hosting…
Its all about, time and money, If you have a lot of time, you can indeed fiddle around with UNIX desktop and trying to make every hardware work… But I presonally would just use windows, IMO it’s hell of a lot easier to manage servers with a laptop preinstalled with Windows than UNIX…
I might be wrong but I have been doing it for quite some time… At the end of the day, it’s personal preference…
Comment by mlankton on 28 February 2008:
I began with Digital Unix around, oh 1994. It wasn’t long before I had linux on my home computer, and not long after that that I had moved to a combination of FreeBSD and in 1996 OPENSTEP was added to the home network. I’ve also had a fair amount of Solaris experience.
My preference is for unix, any flavor of unix, over windows. But think back to when I started using unix. Windows was simply unusable. It’s better now, but it’s still a pig, and I’ve been a unix guy for almost 15 years.
As I’ve said previously many times here on Connected, I use a Mac at home, and it does everything I need it to. If I needed my laptop to fill the same role my Power Mac does, you’re right, I would be better off saving my money til I could justify a Macbook Pro. For my laptop usage (web publishing, light graphics manipulation, remote server administration, web browsing and email) FreeBSD or linux fit the bill, and are more familiar to me. Besides years of experience using FreeBSD, my web server is a FreeBSD box, and it never hurts to spend more time on a system you administer.
I also feel that Xwindows is a lot closer than it was to being a comfortable desktop than it was 8 years ago, by a long shot.
Comment by Mark from Bloglyne on 28 February 2008:
Totally agree with the Vista assessment - but I find myself “time poor” when it comes to everything I have my hands in (which is also why Vista ticked me off… cuz I had to relearn everything). But, learning a new OS has got to be one of those things that is WAAAAAAY down at the bottom of the list of things I do NOT ever want to do - not to mention having to deal with the headaches of finding new office software, etc.
Switching to a unix based system is more of a time/fear issue for me. It is good to hear that you have had a good experience on FreeBSD, but Phil makes my point for me - if we switch over and can’t get that one feature, piece of hardware, or software feature to work, then we are faced with the horrible task of switching back - more time consumption with little or no payback.
Thanks for the detailed article!