> For FreeBSD to approach even a fraction of Linux' mainstream adoption, significant development and support improvements are necessary.

Which exactly? Because this isn't a fair argument.

> FreeBSD doesn't work with my WiFi chip

This is because 95% of the time vendors never push support for the OS. Remember ten years ago when vendors didn't even support Linux? I recall those days when WiFi was pretty much non-existent on Linux.

I'm sick of the blaming FreeBSD gets for something that they have no control over.

Everything Linux can do, I can do in FreeBSD. What features are you missing from FreeBSD?

Docker is always shouted the loudest; DevOp gibberish for laziness. The overhead and tech debt for Docker is atrocious, security is abysmal, but you don't need to worry about that as long you have a shiny button that starts your container.

If you actually had documentation for your stack, you could run it in a jail with less-effort, more security and better performance than docker, k8 and podman combined.

But this isn't FreeBSD's problem; and when it is, there's probably an alternative and a better one at that. Blame the product for not supporting thas requiring additional engineering that costs resources.

> This extends to other features like Widevine, making it impossible to use streaming services such as Netflix, Prime Video, or Spotify.

This isn't FreeBSD's fault nor impossible.

> Widevine is a proprietary digital rights management (DRM) system developed by Google.

Google is the culprit here; they could support FreeBSD but refuse to. So you can't blame FreeBSD and that FreeBSD doesn't bend over to Google is ++.

I'm watching South Park right now on Paramount Plus just fine via a PreSonus Pre-Amp, with four screens on XFCE with two of those connected via daisy chaining with a glass of wine. Heck, if I turn on my TV I can instantly connect to my DNLA server that runs on my home machine in a jail. How's that for snark?

Netflix and all other DRM platforms can work just fine via Google Chrome with Linux Compat installed requiring no other requirements which is pretty amazing in my eyes. [0]

[0] https://github.com/mrclksr/linux-browser-installer

The fact that FreeBSD has the ability to do something as cool as that makes it to my books. I can use Linux in FreeBSD, yet can't use FreeBSD in Linux without a VM? How boring.

My servers in colocation have solidity in uptime, I can't fault it, but maybe I'm bias. FreeBSD is my daily driver.

Server:
11:11PM up 790 days, 19:38, 8 users, load averages: 0.31, 0.32, 0.27

There's no requirement in needing to reboot, Linux, yeah I understand the need to. FreeBSD, nah. I should, but not concerned. I have multiple jails running bHyve virtual machines all with the same amount of uptime. I'm sure this will make folk froth at the mouth, why should I reboot when in the past 790 days, I've had no issues? And I'm sure CVE's exist.. for all the packages that I'm not running that would be running on Linux.

Everything is isolated to a jail and with the server only running jails of the latest version of FreeBSD, that's firewalled off to the world with it's own efficient network stack and my own selection of kernel - show me Linux doing the same.

PC:

11:22PM up 15 days, 3:36, 3 users, load averages: 0.53, 0.55, 0.82

Show me something where FreeBSD has been refusing on implementing. There has been a reason to why Sony, Nintendo, NASA, Apple and more have all used source of BSD to power their core of their products.