How to tell whether or not an operating system is shit

I kept hearing good things about True or but it looks like it's no substitute for FreeBSD.

You can even compile your own kernel to remove bloat you don't want (It's all menu driven).
All you need: freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/

If it's written in C or C++, it's shit and will probably be responsible for the next Heartbleed, Shellshock, Stuxnet, "goto fail", or Equifax hack. C++ code can be pwned by analyzing certain DNA sequences. Imagine hackers putting shellcode in DNA. A DNS query can take over your computer if you use systemd. Audio, video, and even a still image can let a hacker take control. Just creating a thumbnail can do it. Even the "strings" command can fuck you up.

If it's written in Ada, it's a lot better. Ada has bounds checking and doesn't use null-terminated strings, so none of these bugs can happen.

C has its problems but at least use ones that aren't either unrelated or do insane things, Heartbleed was caused by ssl rolling its own memory management and having debug always on.

Usability.
Does it have the tools I and/or my team need to get their job done in an efficient way. Not only does the OS come with its own tools to do so but are the software tools there that everyone will need and can agree to work with?
And support...what would support look like for any problems down the road? How much could it potentially cost in money and lost time?
Ease of assimilation should also be considered. If this is to be a desktop environment for my production team to use then how easy will a new employee be able to get into using it? There is a reason why Windows is so common for desktop environments in offices.
Another factor is portability. This kind of goes under long-term support. Am I able to get this OS/environment to run on newer hardware should the need arise? Am I dooming myself and my team to third-rate hardware because what I'm using is some barely supported hipster bullshit?
Vendor Lock-In is also another consideration. But since we're generally talking about "Free" operating systems in this thread, this is something you need not worry too much about.

At the end of the day, the OS just needs to work just like the software on it needs to just work with little to no hassle at all to yourself and your team.

With that said, I like to tinker and experiment and I have recently started poking around with FreeBSD. I got as far as finishing the install and taking my sweet time (procrastinating) in getting the rest of it up to speed. Mainly because I am reading through the manual in a way I never did for other OSs.
I have to say, at this point, I don't see a reason why anybody would use BSD as a desktop environment especially when nearly every GNU+Linux distribution is pushed as a desktop OS. Yes yes I know you can use it as a server and whatever but it is clear Linux has the superior support, out of the box, in every major/popular distribution for it.

BSD strikes me as something you'd want to run your back-ends on.

He wants no thrills, so he's not going to need cutting edge graphics drivers, BSD will be fine.

it is

so an OS like Plan9/Inferno?

If it requires/recommends mouse, I'm not interested.
Has to be immediately programmable, dev tools are inherently part of the OS.
Documentation on disk that doesn't suck. So no incomplete/outdated HOWTOs, and no going online to browse endless wikis...

Hard to beat (any) of the BSDs when it comes to documentation and quality man pages.

They don't write documentation to software i actually wants to use normally.

is it made by apple?
good

is it not made by apple?
bad

What the fuck are you talking about

Some scientifc program that analyzes DNA samples can be used to gain root when feeding it certain samples.

Plan 9 is another Bell Labs turd, deliberately bad, while being bloated. With the features it provides, it should fit on a floppy disk several times, but it doesn't even have dynamic linking because Rob Pike doesn't know how to do it right.

It depends on what roles you expect the OS to fill, which may be different depending on who you ask

Too me, a general purpose operating system should fulfill the following roles;

1.) Build the kernel for engineers and developers, build the userland for users, keep the two separate and mutually exclusive. Do not mix kernel design philosophies with userland design philosophies. the user experience is paramount

2.) The OS should provide a way of developing native applications for it out of the box as a built in feature (which unfortunately is still an alien concept to most OS designers)

It was better in the old days. Machine booted into ROM BASIC, and you had full access to every part of hardware, just by POKEing some machine code in memory and running it. I don't even like this kernels vs. userland divide. Computer should run my code at highest level, I do what I want, when I want. Computer should be simple enough to comfortably program in assembly. Basically Terry Davis has the right idea, but I don't like x86. M680x0 was just about perfect. After that things went to shit. I don't need all these multicores and memory and GPU and other shit. I need simple hardware that's transparent enough to control directly, and not depend on someone else to make OS that I'm not gonna like anyway, because they're all shit.

Fixed. All modern software is shit.

THE BEST!
Enjoy!

Is it fast, secure, stable, convenient, does it have large, well maintained repos, lots of hardware drivers, a large support community, and it's likely to still be around in a few years? Do the maintainers and admins have a good attitude and no commercial incentive to screw over their user base for profit?

If so, it's Debian, and that's what you should be using. Slackware second, but when Volkerding goes, it'll be ripped apart by wolves and turn to shit.

CWM is comfy as fuck. How I ever used anything else I have no idea.

Apple ][ had all of that: BASIC in rom on the mobo with peek/poke. But you didn't need it because it had something better, 'the monitor' on rom. You could read and modify memory in hexadecimal format, or disassemble it as you scrolled through it. Open the monitor, modify or enter some hex code and execute it. If you had the old integer BASIC rom, you could execute programs one instruction at a time. You could also easily modify the hardware or fix it yourself. Wozniak was a much cooler guy than Jobs.

is Black Arch worth it?

or Tails?

No

Only if you're not on a watch list

Antergos?
I'm downloading that right now - it's basically arch-linux with some extra drivers.
-----------
Here's something I wrote on another thread in here, maybe you can make a suggestion

i shouldn't use tails if im flagged, why?

I can already tell that it isn't good enough for day to day desktop use.

I can back this user up.
Debian is what I dual-boot

systemDebian respects your freedums

not the same user but systemd is p simple to remove from Debian as per instructions here: without-systemd.org/wiki/index.php/Debian_Stretch

if I was op, I'd start with debian cli, remove sysd, add wayland or X and go with i3 wm

Considering you are probably then using another repo you might as well use Devuan.

Is the genome or whateverthefuck real? It would make me zuz if someone's genes could hack a computer.

nice time frame

At least it's not webkit.

I'd rather start without systemd than start with it and have to hack some clusterfuck solution to get rid of it.

Or you know since if you fuck around with the init you'd be personally responsile if it fails you can leave it alone since it's the best thing to happen to open-source software since Linux and Devuan is a Microsoft psyopresponsile

Or you know since if you fuck around with the init you'd be personally responsible if it fails you can leave it alone since it's the best thing to happen to open-source software since some finn wrote a kernel and released it under the GPL.

I think your bot is broken.

poettering pls die

"Error: Wrong password." I don't get it, or why rights to post deletion aren't managed by cookies in the first place. But the only place you'll find spergs spergy enough to have a problem with a good piece of software are here where one doesn't need to be knowledgeable to have a voice.

Yeah, I'll just stick to Void or OpenBSD and avoid cancerD altogether, thanks.

Post your Void or OpenBSD workstation, faggot. Or your Windows gaymen "battlestation".

The document on display might be of particular interest to you since you seem to have skipped some classes in shill school.

I said workstation, not shitpost machine. Or do you seriously do nothing but read muh redpill nonsense and fear the man coming for you for reading it? Buy a gun.

...

I clearly said workstation, gaymer scum.

lol

I always looked at an OS as just a tool to get something done, so I'm fluid with what I use. What made you stick with Void?

Number 5 on the displayed document.

Because Arch went with SystemD mainly. Lets me build a system essentially the way I want without having to compile everything.

Yes, an OS is a tool. You don't use tools that are known to be defective. And distros with systemd are known to be defective.

As a huge faggot I found systemD just couldn't fill this gaymers void.

I don't think you bought that 3.5GB display adapter in order to quicker render the resistance.

It's the most hackery-looking OS with which you can virtue signal against systemd without doing anything that would take any effort or hold up your computer and prevent you from rebooting into your gaymen battlestation.

That's only relative to what you use it for. Normalfags who want to meme on facebook don't give two shits about systemD, so when someone asks me to fix an issue on their windows 7 malwarebox, I throw Ubuntu on it and they leave me alone.

Number 6 and number 13 on the displayed document.

that's pretty neat tbh. trying it on virtualbox now

"Yawn."
Which commandments did that response break?

14

I'd have said 8, but it's your rag.

Well, TrueOS is based on FreeBSD, so I guess not

but can it go into the anus?