|
Ok, I see downvotes coming and I understand I didn't give enough context so I'll try to clarify. I use BSD, particularly FreeBSD and OpenBSD, for two decades now. For the last 15 years professionally. Four "recognized" members of BSD family are FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD and DragonflyBSD. Each of them pursue different goals - FreeBSD stability, OpenBSD security, NetBSD portability, DragonflyBSD no idea, never tried it. All of them have similar (make) but different way of building (poudriere / dpb) and managing (pkg / pkg_) packages, similar (rc) but different way of managing system services (rc.d/ / rc.conf.local), similar (ifconfig) but different (rc.conf's ifconfig_if / hostname.if) way of setting network interfaces, similar but different ways of containerization and virtualization (jails, chroot, vmm, bhyve) etc. I have reasons why I would choose FreeBSD over OpenBSD for storage server (ZFS), or vice versa for router / firewall (rdomains, pf, bgpd, ospfd, iked / ipsec etc.) I don't have a slightest idea why would I choose HelloSystem or HardenedBSD for my laptop instead of FreeBSD. |
I haven't actually tried HelloSystem on real hardware as a daily driver, but I can clearly see why people would find it valuable (at least according to their stated goals).
The reasons are the same as why you'd choose Ubuntu over Slackware: the base install is intended as a fully functional desktop OS. Focus on the OOB experience, vertical integration, accessibility, polish, simplicity, etc. Even if you're a power user, there is still value to having all of these things: your energy is probably better spent on something more useful than figuring why basic, random stuff isn't working. (Assuming HelloSystem delivers on their stated goals!)
It is true that these are all "merely" downstream projects, but I wouldn't dismiss them on these grounds alone. As long as any improvements can be ported back to FreeBSD, it's a win for everyone involved.