Discussion
Loading...
@governa I’m sorry, but this is wrong:
“GhostBSD is to BSD what Ubuntu is to Linux, whereas FreeBSD is to BSD what Arch is to Linux.”
Better to say that GhostBSD is what Ubuntu is to Debian, and FreeBSD is GNU/Linux. There is no standalone BSD system, and FreeBSD is realistically like a GNU system with a Linux kernel.
I get what you want to say, but it is historically and factually wrong.
That article was a scrape of a ZDNET article:
https://www.zdnet.com/article/freebsd-linux-review/
The author didn't do a great job explaining what FreeBSD has to offer, or how viable any of the BSDs are on the desktop. I don't even think he mentioned efforts in the FreeBSD project to make a KDE desktop part of the installer.
At least he mentioned GhostBSD. I don't think that the terms "distro" and "distribution" need be exclusively Linux-related. I think of GhostBSD as a distribution of FreeBSD, and I definitely recommend it for first-time BSD desktop users.
CC: @governa@fosstodon.org
