FreeBSD Myths
I think the best thing about FreeBSD is the incredibly high quality of its users; I don&#x27;t know how that would fit into a &quot;myths&quot; page, but it&#x27;s worth knowing. Maybe in a section covering how much less popular FreeBSD is than Linux and other operating systems. It could point at that while there are (many) fewer users, they are, on average, extremely well-educated about their system.<p>I&#x27;m nearly always impressed by the quality of bug reports we get from FreeBSD users. They&#x27;re more likely to include a patch, more likely to include specific details about how to reproduce the problem and reasonable theories about why the problem is happening. I don&#x27;t know if this is correlation or causation (or which direction the cause&#x2F;effect goes; i.e. are FreeBSD users better educated and that&#x27;s why they choose FreeBSD, or are they better educated because they have to be in order to survive on a more challenging platform...thus it could be survival bias, rather than any real cause&#x2F;effect) and I don&#x27;t know if it is self-reinforcing (i.e. smart users breed more smart users because they&#x27;re better able to guide new users in smart directions).<p>All that said, lest I begin to sound too positive about FreeBSD, I still use Linux exclusively for my production servers and desktop&#x2F;laptop. It&#x27;s a great system with great users, but the sheer inertia of the Linux ecosystem is overwhelming. The Linux kernel alone has more contributors in <i>each release</i> than the entirety of the 400 commit bit havers on the whole of FreeBSD.<p>Luckily, of course, FreeBSD gets to leverage lots of things that are mostly driven by the Linux ecosystem (Gnome, KDE, etc. all sorts of things that are predominantly funded by Red Hat, Canonical, SuSE, IBM, etc. for their Linux products).