So yeah, that's probably a good example. That guy is a technical enough user that he knows his needs well and can solve issues he may have that non-technical users would be unable to.
But most of the reasoning behind what he lists as advantages or for using it can apply to Linux also.
Let's look at the points:
> It’s uncompromising. It’s not a people-pleaser or vendor-pleaser. Linux is in everything from Android phones to massive supercomputers, so has to include features for all of them. The OpenBSD developers say no to most things. Instead of trying to make it do more, they keep it focused on doing what it does with more security and reliability. It’s uncompromising. It’s not a people-pleaser or vendor-pleaser. Linux is in everything from Android phones to massive supercomputers, so has to include features for all of them. The OpenBSD developers say no to most things. Instead of trying to make it do more, they keep it focused on doing what it does with more security and reliability.
The Linux kernel can be compiled with everything disabled aside from what is strictly needed, and there are plenty of uncompromising distros. Saying "Linux has more choice and supports more things" isn't really a point against it, and therefore not a reason to use OpenBSD.
> They review and remove code as often as they add. If something is unused, unmaintained, or unnecessary, they’ll axe it. If it’s unwieldy, they’ll make a small simple replacement. For examples, see doas, OpenSMTPD, httpd, and LibreSSL. This is great for security, too. The more code, the more chance of a bug that could compromise your entire computer. The less code, the better. Each new release seems to be getting leaner by removing old cruft. No other operating system does that.
No other OS removes old cruft? I'm not even sure listing doas an example of a 'small simple replacement', when it was a hobby project of an OBSD developer to fix some personal issues. And actually modern Sudo was pretty much developed by a different OBSD developer. So an OBSD developer writing a replacement for a different OBSD developer's tool because it was too unwieldy isn't that great a point IMO.
> Great documentation is a top priority. The built-in man pages are amazing. So if you’re stuck on anything, searching the man pages on your own computer is going to give you a better answer than searching Google. (This makes it nicer to work offline, too.)
Plenty of other distros or projects have fantastic documentation to, just not in man pages. On some linux systems documentation will be in info pages rather than man pages, but these days I mostly read what I need in a browser. And I've never really run into an issue with a lack of documentation either when without internet or any of the distros I use. Specifically here Sivers is basically arguing that the man pages in particular are better, and well, many developers and systems have moved on from man pages.
> The installers are amazing. The initial installation takes like five minutes. Hit [Enter] to the defaults, make your username and password, and it’s ready to go. Then the software installer is ideal, too. Just pkg_info to search for something and pkg_add to install it in seconds. (Which also installs all of its documentation, too.)
I mean, it's just a basic installer, no different from NetBSD, Slackware or Alpines.
> Everything is rock-solid and just works. Hardware I couldn’t get working in Linux just works on a first try with OpenBSD. And because they don’t stay cutting-edge, keeping a cautious pace, it keeps working and doesn’t break. The whole system is carefully planned and consistent, instead of a hodge-podge of bits and pieces.
There are plenty of distros and if you like kernel forks that the exact same is true for.
> It’s all free and run by helpful volunteers. If you searched ports, but some application you need is missing or out of date, just contact the maintainer and offer some assistance or money to help get it updated or added. I’ve donated $3850 to the developers to help improve the OpenBSD port of Node.js, Elixir, Erlang, Anki, Ledger, and Qutebrowser.
And this is true for any FOSS OS.
Look, I like operating systems like OBSD....Slackware was my daily driver for many years, now I use alpine. I value lack of nonsense, lack of clutter and the ability to pretty much know every file on my system, every process, and know what it's doing - no obfuscation or bs. I get all of that, but none of the alleged strengths particular to OBSD that Sivers mentions are really convincing points. He could easily be running a similar OS and be just as happy, or happier since he would have much better performance.
