This story reminds me of Jan Koum (of Whatsapp) when he donated a million dollars to FreeBSD: "one of the main reasons I got a job at Yahoo! is because they were using FreeBSD, and it was my operating system of choice. Years later, when Brian and I set out to build WhatsApp, we used FreeBSD to keep our servers running. We still do." (https://www.facebook.com/jan.koum/posts/10152852986375011)
It would be interesting to read about their experiences over the last 18 years.
I recently installed FreeBSD on a home server and was very pleased both with the process and the result. Also, the documentation is just impressive (that goes, in my experience, for all the BSD systems).
I was at Y! from 2004 to 2011, when I started it was FreeBSD only except for acquisitions. When I left it was a mix of FreeBSD and RHEL, with everyone being strongly encouraged to move to RHEL.
I think the justifications were better support for running on Linux (storage drivers, Java, MySQL, oracle), better support for virtualization (although bsd jails are better than virtualization in my opinion, and a better fit for Y!), and it would be easier to support one os instead of two and acquisitions (including inktomi) really wanted to run on Linux.
The drop dead date for getting off FreeBSD kept getting pushed back, but I'd guess they've moved almost everything by now.
Completely not true. Around 2008ish there was a big migration towards using RHEL. There's still some FreeBSD boxes, but the vast majority have been switched at this point to Linux.
I don't completely agree with the reasoning, but it mainly came down to driver support, maintenance cost, and debugging tools.
We used FreeBSD exclusively at my first startup in 1999 (flashbase), partially because of Yahoo's success with it (I was at Stanford). We found the base OS to be very stable and the networking stack to be especially robust. But, the mysql port was not that stable and drivers for proprietary products, like Oracle, were hard to come by.
Back in the day, Oracle did a freebsd driver partially for Yahoo. The Oracle drivers were not open source and hence there were few options to connect without Oracle's help.
I worked in the kernel networking group at SGI in the 90s and there was a lot of freebsd loving there. Also, the FreeBSD license was more relaxed and commercial products (like NetAPP) could include and extend FreeBSD without disclosing their modifications.
Our frustration with lack of support for FreeBSD moved us to choose Linux and Windows (for SQL server support) the next time around in 2004.
FreeBSD has been my server platform since early 2000's, chosen for reliability and relative ease of configuration (vs. Linux, etc.). The primary server for my business was running FBSD since 2005, stopping only for of power outages, or periodic maintenance. (Still works too.) I have used FBSD on desktop systems too, though that has significant limitations.
It's my impression that the pace of FBSD development has been increasing in the last couple of years, hardware/driver compatibility included. As well, it seems recently there's been more "cross fertilization" among the BSDs, and Linux to a lesser extent, signs of health and vigor for these projects.
While there are former FBSD users deciding to go with a different OS, such switching is not new or a one-way thing. I think it's a safe bet some enterprises are choosing FBSD over something else, anyway there's little risk any major FOSS OS project will soon disappear.
I tried both as a teenager. At the time I ended up sticking with Linux, but even in retrospect it's hard to quantify why. I remember though that it felt more understandable and "approachable" somehow. It was little stuff like bash vs csh or the presence of ever so slightly more modern editors and utilities.
I think if FreeBSD would have put a bit more effort into modernization and community in the early to mid 90s we'd all be using it more now. It's guts were superior at the time and in a few ways still are.
There's not being modern, and then there's not chasing every rabbit down every hole. Right now I feel like FreeBSD is a wonderful mix of advanced, modern tech like ZFS and bhyve, married with an absence of "oooo-shiny!" misadventures like PulseAudio and systemd.
And in particular, right now I'm grateful that the BSDs are small enough to be ignored by the herds of people migrating away from Windows and bringing their mindsets with them - that all seems to be landing on Linux.
I wonder how much the reason they are landing on Linux is that there are multiple companies actively trying to pitch Linux to existing Windows users.
RH for instance seems to be heavily pitching RHEL (never mind Fedora and CentOS) towards corporate and the Military-Industrial complex. The latter in particular are interested in RHEL after some poor experience using Windows on warships and similar.
But at the same time there is a pile of MSCEs running around in these organizations, and so there is a incentive to make daily Linux management at least superficially similar to reduce retraining costs.
I had precisely the opposite experience. My father bought me RedHat 5.2 and no matter what I did, I could not get anything but a stuck X -- no mouse, no window manager, no login prompt. every time, just the immovable X.
Returned it for The Complete FreeBSD and never, ever looked back. FreeBSD got me jobs at interesting places, and a handful of life long, interesting friends.
I agree with some of the other replies here -- I'm perfectly happy and even glad the BSDs have exactly the size and composition of users they do.
well, NetBSD needs much more public love, in my opinion.
In the early 2000's i almost exclusively used FreeBSD. The hardware i used were always a bit behind the curve, and still i could max my network connections.
What made me move to Linux eventually, was the ability to keep all my software easily updated, including the kernel.
I've tried FreeBSD on occasion and that's exactly what kept me away from it. Keeping (multiple) systems current is always where most of the work is (if you do keep them current, that is), not on initial installation/configuration.
It's much better than the old days. pkgng and freebsd-update make it pretty straightforward to keep updated... not really any different than on any of the Linux flavors I use. The ports tree is hooked up with pkgng too, so you can mix and match (before they used to recommend you only use one or the other).
Readit News
I recently installed FreeBSD on a home server and was very pleased both with the process and the result. Also, the documentation is just impressive (that goes, in my experience, for all the BSD systems).
I think the justifications were better support for running on Linux (storage drivers, Java, MySQL, oracle), better support for virtualization (although bsd jails are better than virtualization in my opinion, and a better fit for Y!), and it would be easier to support one os instead of two and acquisitions (including inktomi) really wanted to run on Linux.
The drop dead date for getting off FreeBSD kept getting pushed back, but I'd guess they've moved almost everything by now.
Deleted Comment
I don't completely agree with the reasoning, but it mainly came down to driver support, maintenance cost, and debugging tools.
Back in the day, Oracle did a freebsd driver partially for Yahoo. The Oracle drivers were not open source and hence there were few options to connect without Oracle's help.
I worked in the kernel networking group at SGI in the 90s and there was a lot of freebsd loving there. Also, the FreeBSD license was more relaxed and commercial products (like NetAPP) could include and extend FreeBSD without disclosing their modifications.
Our frustration with lack of support for FreeBSD moved us to choose Linux and Windows (for SQL server support) the next time around in 2004.
It's my impression that the pace of FBSD development has been increasing in the last couple of years, hardware/driver compatibility included. As well, it seems recently there's been more "cross fertilization" among the BSDs, and Linux to a lesser extent, signs of health and vigor for these projects.
While there are former FBSD users deciding to go with a different OS, such switching is not new or a one-way thing. I think it's a safe bet some enterprises are choosing FBSD over something else, anyway there's little risk any major FOSS OS project will soon disappear.
I think if FreeBSD would have put a bit more effort into modernization and community in the early to mid 90s we'd all be using it more now. It's guts were superior at the time and in a few ways still are.
And in particular, right now I'm grateful that the BSDs are small enough to be ignored by the herds of people migrating away from Windows and bringing their mindsets with them - that all seems to be landing on Linux.
RH for instance seems to be heavily pitching RHEL (never mind Fedora and CentOS) towards corporate and the Military-Industrial complex. The latter in particular are interested in RHEL after some poor experience using Windows on warships and similar.
But at the same time there is a pile of MSCEs running around in these organizations, and so there is a incentive to make daily Linux management at least superficially similar to reduce retraining costs.
Returned it for The Complete FreeBSD and never, ever looked back. FreeBSD got me jobs at interesting places, and a handful of life long, interesting friends.
I agree with some of the other replies here -- I'm perfectly happy and even glad the BSDs have exactly the size and composition of users they do.
well, NetBSD needs much more public love, in my opinion.
What made me move to Linux eventually, was the ability to keep all my software easily updated, including the kernel.
Honestly, I don't know if this is still the case.
You can use `freebsd-update` to update the OS itself from binaries instead of having to build world. https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/books/handbook/updating-upgra...
You can use also `pkg` to install/upgrade software packages like `apt-get` on Debian derived distros. https://www.freebsd.org/doc/handbook/pkgng-intro.html