tbh I hate Ubuntu ...
Either a standard debian or a RHEL from work even tho they use ancient drivers.
But if I am to choose, I'll always vote for BSD.
why settle for a toy if you can get the real thing ...
Again... This is not a fair argument. What it boils down to is use cases; the usual desktop OS is not a toy, it is a productivity tool. (we'll need to table the usual argument over whether it actually enables productivity or inhibits it for the sake of this discussion
![Wink ;)](https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/xwink.gif.pagespeed.ic.cldandycH0.png)
)
It is not reasonable to expect the average computer user to run a server/workstation OS on their desktop; they have trouble enough remembering to turn on both the PC and the monitor at the same time.
![Laughing :-DD](https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/smiley_laughing.gif.pagespeed.ce._hfWAz_QHO.gif)
The Windows equivalent argument would have been expecting them to use WinNT instead of XP or Win7; yes, many organizations
tried to do this back in the day; it rarely ended well.
Once you've taken the plunge and know your way around the deep dark recesses of
any family of server/workstation OS, anything less will feel restrictive.
But the desktop OS has it's place, and
it still is a valid choice for those who have another job they need to get done
besides being a sysadmin.If we needed any more proof of this, just look at how well Micro$uck's ongoing attempts at turning said desktop environment into a tablet OS have been beaten back again and again by normal people who just want a virtual desktop that works like their IRL desktop; complete with busted stapler, yesterday's coffee cup, and Post-It notes scattered from Hell to breakfast.
mnem
*insert random coffee-related image here* ![Flogging A Dead Horse :horse:](https://www.eevblog.com/forum/Smileys/default/DeadHorse.gif.pagespeed.ce.kBWvHKqCd1.gif)