NomadBSD

Forum Forums General Other Distros NomadBSD

  • This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated Feb 22-5:16 pm by Brian Masinick.
Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #54605
    Moderator
    Brian MasinickBrian Masinick

    I made a copy of Nomad BSD onto USB and tried it out on two laptops: Dell Inspiron 5558 and Lenovo Thinkpad X201.

    Nice responsive software on both systems and it is comparable to antiX in USB boot time. This is a live distribution:
    https://nomadbsd.org/

    Brian Masinick

    #54607
    Member
    AvatarDzhigit

    Interesting. Are the Live USB features as powerful as antiX’s?

    #54609
    Moderator
    Brian MasinickBrian Masinick

    Interesting. Are the Live USB features as powerful as antiX’s?

    No, the features of the distribution are not particularly interesting, but the performance of the image was decent.
    You’d have to be a Berkeley Standard Distribution (BSD) fan to want to use it. However, if you want to explore it, trying out the Live image is the way to go. In fact, I did a search of Live BSD images and found it. So if you are curious and like to experiment, from that perspective it’s decent. Comparing features, the only features I can think of that are remotely comparable to antiX is that it’s capable of booting live and boots in a similar amount of time from the Live image.

    • This reply was modified 1 week, 1 day ago by Brian Masinick.

    Brian Masinick

    #54776
    Moderator
    fatmacfatmac

    I tried it before, maybe I should take another look, (not a big fan of FreeBSD, prefer Net or Open).

    Wish NetBSD still did a live version; OpenBSD has FuguIta, (should you happen to want to take it for a spin).

    http://fuguita.org/

    Linux (& BSD) since 1999

    #54781
    Moderator
    Brian MasinickBrian Masinick

    The one “redeeming feature” of NomadBSD is that with the live version, boot times and start-up performance are pretty good, generally better than what I recall.
    I really have not experimented with many of the BSDs in the past decade, though between 2000-2010 I often used them and they actually had slower performance than most Linux distributions – and I could easily gauge that because I had a Dell Dimension 4100 desktop that was approaching a decade old by the time I retired it.

    In practical terms, most BSD systems, especially the original ones, were solid server operating systems, but only “passable” as a desktop system; in other words, they worked, but their desktop features and desktop performance was unimpressive, whereas, from the nineties to the early 2000s it could be argued that for a while the BSD-based systems had advantages in server configurations. Since I have not used them much, I have no idea if that remains true.

    I will look into http://fuguita.org/ – thanks!

    Brian Masinick

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.