> OpenBSD gets this right, they have clearly defined their global audience as being the “secure OS”.
True but what's funny is I use OpenBSD on my laptop because it "just works" and is super simple to configure and maintain. The security part is a nice side effect! I don't have to fiddle with Xorg.conf, suspend/sleep just work right out the box, lovely.
But especially with OpenBSD, an unreasonably large number of features that less extreme users expect, simply aren't there or do not work properly. Hardware compatibility is still an enormous problem, even on Linux. It's not uncommon to have to buy 3 different USB wifi adapters to find one that works reliably outside of Windows. Many laptops still won't even boot the installer or have some essential missing hardware support like bluetooth. It's always a never-ending battle it seems. Sure for some users who get lucky and just happen to have the right hardware and possibly don't need such features it "just works" for them, but definitely not for everyone. Not by a long shot.
Definitely! The "security" hook works to pull people in, but what keeps us is how much simpler it is and how messy everything else feels after getting used to it. FreeBSD has a ton of cool stuff, but none of it is really unique or messaged in a way that draws people. Where OpenBSD advertises security, NetBSD advertises portability and hackability - Free has all those too, but it doesn't communicate them well.
Make it look nice and be simpler/easier to use. Support more hardware. Advertise it more.
Unfortunately people like what's familiar... and so to really appeal to the masses you have to inch further and further away from what actually makes plan9 different from everything else, at least visually.
I have a thinkpad x1 nano, not sure if that is considered old or not.
I've ran: Windows, Debian, FreeBSD, and OpenBSD on it and OpenBSD is the one I've gone back to and kept because everything works out of the box (except maybe the fingerprint reader - not sure because I don't use it anyway)
OpenBSD gets this right, they have clearly defined their global audience as being the “secure OS”.
Note: they have not defined their audience as “BSD”. It’s just the “secure OS”.
——-
FreeBSD problem is they haven’t defined their audience.
People use FreeBSD because “it’s the performant BSD”.
But that then begs the question, “why use BSD”?
They need to define their audience.
No list of features will do that for you.