>>25604104 I run Linux on my server. I used to have a Windows server until I got tired of it needing constant maintenance.

I use Linux at work but Mac in private

That feel when too low iq to waste my life reconfiguring lunix all day

I don't use linux because I am not a pedophile

I don't use linux because I'm a pedophile.

My Grandpa use Windows. Also some zoomers I know

>>25604104 >Linux just works. And Windows works juster.

When Linux breaks, it's because the user is retarded, only a retard would install Linux afterall.

>>25604457 Why no Brazilball

low IQs coping while Windows 11 doesn't run on my laptop at all

>>25604447 They use the dumbest possible spyware on windows that screencaps your desktop and sends it to microshit of corse for the sake of diagnostics. For that reason alone one should use out-of-the-box stable Linux distro such as debian.

>>25604466 Mods banned my home network out of the blue for something I didn't do (ban messagesaid I posted CP). Not even the first time it happens, but the first time I didn't get unbanned in a few days. And I forgot to switch the URL to garlic against.

> 相撲 > 外人 終わりだ。

>>25604475 >debian >stable

>>25604486 it is

>>25604475 >They use the dumbest possible spyware on windows that screencaps your desktop and sends it to microshit If you cannot disable that, how can you even wipe your ass?

Install debian Apt install cinnamon-core ??? Profit

>>25604490 Oh yes, just disable the malevolence of Microsoft, why haven't I thought of that.

>>25604496 >>25604475 > some thing that was in one testing build version years ago FUD and faggots (Linux users). Name a more iconic duo. Anyway, Ubuntu is full of telemetry.

>>25604496 >malevolence of Microsoft Wow, you spelled Microsoft right. Hand over your Tux badge right now.

>>25604506 Who is shilling Ubuntu here?

>>25604519 > NO, USE ANOTHER DISTRO! I literally played this game back almost 30 years ago, lmfao.

Which is the best Linux?

>>25604529 FreeBSD and Android.

>>25604506 This is why I don't recommend anything from Canonical, and this isn't even about absolute isolated privacy, it's about abandoning the system that spies on you by default. But you do you, whatever.

>>25604534 >This is why I don't recommend anything from Canonical What do you recommend?

>>25604529 If you want Windows, Windows is the best Windows. If you want Unix, Linux is the worst Unix. There's no "good" Linux distro, if it's Linux, it already sucks, but Gentoo, Alpine, and Void are the better ones relative to other Linux systems. >>25604530 And FreeBSD is the 2nd worst Unix, at least among the free ones, I hear e.g. AIX is even worse.

>>25604545 >FreeBSD is the 2nd worst Unix Sure. Why?

>>25604530 BSD is a good choice if you trust the middlemen who port your browsers to BSD. You can download the binaries for Linux of, say, Firefox directly from their website but on BSD there's a dude who has to recompile it for you.

>>25604557 lol

>>25604557 why wouldn't you be using ports if on BSD?

>>25604562 sum ting wong?

>>25604557 >port your browsers Why the fuck would I need a browser on a fokkin server? You don't suggest I use X11/X12(Wayland) on my PERSONAL COMPUTER, lmao, do you?

>>25604550 Literally everything wrong with Linux but only 90% of the way. It breaks when you update. You're going to spend all day configuring, installing, using obtuse command line interfaces by people who didn't think about providing a decent user experience, copypasting stuff from wikis, etc. When a linuxgger uses FreeBSD, they find it revolutionary because it's like Linux but only 90% as bad, but once you're out of the Linux cycle of suffering, you just see that both are shit.

>>25604571 >Literally everything wrong with Linux Like what? Actually, screw this. What are the top three Unices in your opinion that I _should_ use today?

>>25604567 Nigga FreeBSD literally begs you to use it on Desktop PC.

>>25604581 It doesn't. And I don't. It's the best server OS hands down though.

>>25604542 No answer. >>25604575 No answer. Kids, duh.

>>25604598 You illiterate nigger you didn't even read the thread.

>>25604602 Just answer.

>>25604575 The only thing I recommend to a linuxgger is to go back to Windows. Linux users are Windows users who have been propagandized to hate Microsoft by the FSF, but they still want Windows. This is proven by the fact that they replicate Windows exactly on Linux. Windows is the worst desktop OS ever made, I don't want it, and I don't want its users (Windows clone Linux users among them) to turn everything else into Windows like a swarm of locusts. FreeBSD users one of oldschool unix hackers who have been living under a digital rock these past 30 years, corporations who found the project even more willing to do their bidding than Linux, or Linux users who found a revolutionary OS that is only 90% as broken as Linux. Oldschool unix hackers can use the other BSDs, corporations can get out, Linux users can go back to Windows.

1980s: > GNU's Not Unix 20x0s: > Linus'es Not Windows

>>25604646 I asked > What are the top three Unices in your opinion that I _should_ use today? Not for a drunken rant about Windows and Linux.

>>25604611 No answer. 🙄

>>25604672 I like NetBSD because it runs on a toaster and it still feels like a cohesive little system. It has its problems, mainly in the slow development cycle and lack of investment, but it is miles better than FreeBSD unless you have exactly the right hardware. For instance NetBSD has no trouble with big/little architectures on Aarch64

>>25604661 See the last line: >Oldschool unix hackers can use the other BSDs, corporations can get out, Linux users can go back to Windows. <Oldschool unix hackers can use the other BSDs <the other BSDs There are only 2 of them though. >inb4 DragonflyBSD, HardenedBSD Haven't differentiated themselves from FreeBSD, DragonflyBSD is mostly about kernel performance, HardenedBSD is mostly about toolchain hardening, they're cool things to explore but don't solve the shitty FreeBSD user experience.

>>25604704 >it is miles better than FreeBSD Unless you actually has to use it on something production tier.

>>25604716 Why is that?

>>25604713 > OpenBSD > has no filesystem better than UFS (equal to ext-fucking-two for Linux folks) nice joke.

>>25604716 Also, see: >corporations can get out If a sysadmin jeet decides it's "production tier," something has to be terribly wrong with it.

>>25604720 Which filesystem do you use with it for starters?

>>25604738 What if you are a jeet?

>try install kubuntu in new 'dual boot' PC >display is cropped, can't see buttons on installer >somehow manage to install by spazzing on keyboard >monitor isn't recognised even after installing drivers >google the issue, trawl several linux troubleshooting forums and find terminal command to ctrl+v and fix the issue >the command breaks the kubuntu install, kubuntu no longer boots that was my linux experience

>>25604749 It uses ffs but you can use ZFS for everything except root fs. The netbsd zfs by default thing has been an ongoing project for years, I don't know the state of the completion. They're also working on hammer implementation since a couple of years ago.

>>25604806 > I don't know the state of the completion Exactly. > FFS > production Can I install Win11 onto FAT32 I wonder?

>>25604749 >Which filesystem do you use with it for starters? FFS is essentially the only filesystem you can use on NetBSD. It supports others, but they can't be the root. There are some janky setups where you make root FFS then pivot to a different root on another FS, but going through the work of configuring and fiddling with that is Linux tier.

>>25604817 ffs isn't a 32 bit filesystem, not sure what you're implying

>>25604823 I think he's assuming they're the same because of age and assuming old and outdated have the same meaning, even though e.g. ext4 is literally a FFS clone.

>>25604818 >FFS is essentially the only filesystem you can use on NetBSD. And that disqualifies it from being anything but a geek toy. FreeBSD at least had (amazing) SoftUpdates for 20 or 30 years and afterwards the rock solid ZFS for over 10.

>>25604834 ext4 (even 3) are journaling filesystems. ext2 is kinda what FAT32 was but with Unix permissions.

>>25604840 ext2 is FFS without fragments (a feature for having files smaller than the disk block size), this was done for performance. It also has some small changes to improve the performance of the algorithms used in the filesystem. ext3 and 4 are ext2 with extended limits, journaling, and more performance improvements. You probably don't even know what journaling does. And NetBSD's FFS has journaling, off by default. And the FFS filesystems on the BSDs have also received performance improvements, increased limits, and journaling (in the case of NetBSD). They just didn't call them new filesystems. FAT32 has nothing to do with ext2 beyond both being filesystems, the design is completely different.

>>25604835 I guess if your requirement is to run zfs as the root fs then ok. Although is that how you set up your servers, to run the same fs you have the os as the fs to store your data?

>>25604894 > You probably don't even know what journaling does I do very well actually. And that was a must 20 years ago. Today COW FSs beat that of course. >>25604895 > Has no idea about ZFS, its organizaitons, and its features.

>>25604915 Yeah I've not got a lot of experience with zfs. I never pretended to though, so your post is strangely accusatory. Can you just tell me why it would be necessary to have that setup as I described?

>>25604931 ZFS is a big paradigm shift in general about how think about your disks. And once you learn it you it's really cringe to see the legacy systems. Just install FreeBSD (especially on RAIDZ) and play with it for a week or two to get enlightened.

>>25604950 I have and I'm getting Linux autism vibes from you, I'm assuming you spend all day fiddling with your ZFS settings. ZFS has compression, parity with checksumming instead of praying incompetent hardware manufacturers report disk errors properly, the first time snapshots are usable, deduping which doesn't work particularly well, and using faster storage as cache (L2ARC). It's not some revolution in filesystems. And CoW filesystems aren't improvements on previous designs, just a different set of tradeoffs.

>>25604976 >It's not some revolution in filesystems It is.

>>25604979 Good night though, it's 1:40 AM here in Moscow.