Is there any serious reason to use BSD over Linux?

>>61613561
you realize 4chan is being run on a cluster of mac mini's in Moot's basement that are using BSD, right?

>>61613561
Dunno. Try out both and pick the one you like the most.

>>61613578
What does this have to do with /pol/?

>>61613596
Hasn't 4chan been move to official servers long before moot gave this site up to Hiro?

>>61613561
Is there an serous reason to use Linux over Windows?

>>61613561
- you hate GNU
- Zfs is nice
- you want to run a server

>>61613610
nah Moot still has the keys to the 4chan servers. He became a silent partner ever since that whole thing with his "girlfriend" posting images on social media with other dudes
>>61613613
>Is there an serous reason to use Linux over Windows?
because there comes a time when you need to grow up and use a proper OS

>>61613561
To impress chicks.

>>61613561
What a perfect being.

Ahem... My favorite part of the Bad Software Distribution is how it doesn't work. Stick with Slackware, it comes with GOOD software that functions and so on and so forth.

>>61613596
>Moot
who

>>61613712
I vaguely remember something about a "moot" but I can't recall the details.

None whatsoever.

>>61613712
The facebook guy.

File: 1470744022792.jpg (729KB, 3540x1044px) Image search: [Google]

729KB, 3540x1044px

>>61613712

>>61613766
Tom?

Perhaps if you feel unworthy of an operating system where things just work.

>>61613626
when will the zfs meme finally die

the gnu/linux kernel is too cumbersome and honestly a huge clusterfuck, this was said by linus himself, your only real options if you want to avoid the SystemD bug is too use slackware or gentoo, slackware is decent i guess.

i've been running UNIX since I was like 11-12, started on a SparcStation 20 and a Ultra 5, from the beginning i've always preferred BSD based OSes such as solaris, irix and openbsd/freebsd/netbsd to linux, always faster, works right out of the box, and are mostly fully customizable.

currently i run openbsd, i've ran freebsd in the past and i guess it was decent but openbsd was easier to configure for me, and was proven at defcon to be the winner when considering secruity as compared to netbsd and freebsd.

i heavily use darknetmarkets, and botnet ridden software with easy vulnerabilitys just won't cut it, openbsd is currently my favorite operating system, maybe solaris but it's mostly antiquated.

>>61613962
reported to the FBI

>>61613995
im behind 8 proxies, good luck faglord

>>61613858
fucking kek pls tell me youre kidding

>>61613561
You have autism ascended to the next level.

>>61613862
When it stops being objectively the best filesystem.

APFS and btrfs are far behind still.

>>61613962
>always faster, works right out of the box
really? thought they didn't have as good hardware support compared to linux, especially for laptops
what about software support? daily use?

>>61613962
yeah Linux absolutely buttfucking kFreeBSD in every way, which is even faster than the OpenBSD kernel, what a clusterfuck
https://openbenchmarking.org/result/1412060-LI-KFREEBSD879

>>61615908
openbsd with kde worked without any extra config on both my workstation and dell r710, linux struggled to start a xserver and had trouble working with raid on my r710 and almost corrupted my HDD on my workstation, neither of those issues were prevalent on openbsd. software support honestly is lacking, all my essentials run so i have no issues. i may try dualbooting slackware for games, not sure yet.
>>61615988
all depends on the config friendo
>which is even faster then the openbsd kernal
please prove this

>>61613794
Jeff Bezos

>>61613561
If you have severe autism then yes.

>>61613709
Really activated my almonds.

hey
stop posting coalburners

>>61613561
If you show off your tiling wm and tweak your mpv config for optimal anime watching: no. In fact it might even be worse because video cards don't play as nicely with BSD.

If you want to run a server, write a program, or maybe just appreciate simplicity in general, then yes. Since BSDs are developed by the same team from the kernel level up, things are much more cohesive, simple, and well-documented. For example writing a musical instrument in C is much easier with sndio then with pulseaudio.

>>61615873
dont you dare even but APFS and btrfs in the same comparison, APFS is trying but feature wise is still a joke both feature and integrity wise compared to zfs or btrfs.
zfs and btrfs are albeit age, muh test of time, feature additions, etc.

>>61616902
>APFS/btrfs is trying but feature wise is still a joke both feature and integrity wise compared to zfs
ftfy
literally who uses btrfs for anything?

>>61616472
>openbsd with kde worked without any extra config on both my workstation and dell r710
okay, but that isn't how it is for most laptops and computer hardware. That being said i'll admit major ones like thinkpads work typically completely fine
>linux struggled to start a xserver
this just makes you sound like a fucking retard
>and had trouble working with raid on my r710
and this almost moreso
>almost corrupted my HDD on my workstation
and even moreso with this

blaming an OS for your own incompetencies is never the right arguement

>>61615908
he's memeing you, openbsd has shit tier multithreaded support, anyone who calls it faster is trolling you
now if someone said freebsd is faster I'd
certainly believe them under various workloads

>>61613561
licensing

>>61616931
>feature wise
>zfs

zfs's whole advantage is that it's not getting additional development feature wise. It's stagnating while btrfs is developing. That isn't a bad thing at all for enterprise storage but for users who want the next great thing it is.

>>61616980
i haven't wanted an FS feature since dir_index in 2002, literally just don't lose my fucking bits

>>61616964
>but that isn't how it is for most laptop and computer hardware
guess im lucky

worded that post really weirdly, im pretty high on cough syrup rn, hard to type. linux was unable to work with the embedded matrox GPU on my server and was unable to start X, it was also unable to find any drives on my R710 even though they popped up fine in openbsd,

i don't believe either of these errors to be based on my incompetence, it just would not function on install. after installing debian on my workstation and restarting it after install, my drive was almost completley corrupt, if i had saved my hentai on there, i would have been beat, why do you still advocate for this shitty os?

>>61616976
not memeing, linux always slows to a halt particularly when browsing the web or compiling software, there is a significint increase in speed compared to linux.

>>61613561
shit does this woman ever eat?

>>61618876
Let me guess, you're American? Not every woman has to be 200+ pounds with saggy love handles... I mean, "curves". In other parts of the world, you'll find plenty of women with completely healthy body shapes, rather than fat... I mean, "thicc" (sorry, have to speak African Jailmerican to make sure I'm understood by the average American)

Install Qubes OS. The most secure Linux and Windows operating system. It uses AppVMs, Templates for AppVms, and DispVms, etc.

>>61618958
based sweetie poster

>>61618876
She's a perfectly healthy size. Not everyone has a fetish for cows like you m8

>>61613561
Shouldn't her nipples be showing if she's not wearing a bra?

File: 4869124-android18futurenvhoft.png (389KB, 450x696px) Image search: [Google]

389KB, 450x696px

>>61613561

>>61616979
Yeah like that ever mattered

>>61613561
sounds better than gahnuu loonix

>zfs
>OS cohesion

>>61613712
>>61613741
>>61613766
>>61613794

U mean the tranny emma watson ?

>>61613561
>Is there any serious reason to use BSD over Linux?
BSD is about 25 years old. I'm going to assume you mean one of its descendants, like FreeBSD, etc.

FreeBSD: For servers, and when you want ZFS.
OpenBSD: When you want a secure base system and are willing to trade speed and convenience for it.
NetBSD: When you need a Unix-like OS on your Sega Dreamcast or your toaster.
DragonflyBSD: When you need an OS with a pretty logo. Also HAMMER I guess.

>>61613962
>the gnu/linux kernel
There is no such thing. The GNU project has a kernel, but it is called the HURD.

And there is the Linux kernel.

But no gnu/linux kernel.

>>61619693
Those are some pretty poor summaries. FreeBSD makes a perfectly fine desktop, as do the other three. DragonflyBSD more so, as they've been ahead of the curve on porting Linux Radeon drivers for years now. As for OpenBSD - it ships with a graphical desktop, and has packages for Firefox, mpv, alongside a lot of other GUI software. There's a plethora of daemons that come with it too, more so than any other operating system. So that convenience claim is just confusing.

>>61613561
no
just faggotry

>>61613561
Uuuuuh... uuuuuuh... Unless you wanna build your own commercial OS without getting legal problems, I don't see any other uses.

>>61619796
That's a pretty poor critique of my summaries.

In key differences to the user, these are the main points.

>https://www.freebsd.org/doc/en/articles/explaining-bsd/comparing-bsd-and-linux.html

4.5
Linux is available under the GNU General Public License (GPL), which is designed to eliminate closed source software. In particular, any derivative work of a product released under the GPL must also be supplied with source code if requested. By contrast, the BSD license is less restrictive: binary-only distributions are allowed. This is particularly attractive for embedded applications.

4.6
The “all from one supplier” nature of BSD means that upgrades are much easier to handle than is frequently the case with Linux. BSD handles library version upgrades by providing compatibility modules for earlier library versions, so it is possible to run binaries which are several years old with no problems.

4.7
- BSD systems, in particular FreeBSD, can have notably higher performance than Linux. But this is not across the board. In many cases, there is little or no difference in performance. In some cases, Linux may perform better than FreeBSD.
- In general, BSD systems have a better reputation for reliability, mainly as a result of the more mature code base.
- BSD projects have a better reputation for the quality and completeness of their documentation. The various documentation projects aim to provide actively updated documentation, in many languages, and covering all aspects of the system.
- The BSD license may be more attractive than the GPL.
- BSD can execute most Linux binaries, while Linux can not execute BSD binaries. Many BSD implementations can also execute binaries from other UNIX® like systems. As a result, BSD may present an easier migration route from other systems than Linux would.

>As a side note
In terms of performance it's worth noting that the BSD kernel scales much better than the Linux kernel under certain workloads, and you can sometimes see huge performance advantages with BSD. I'm not sure why.

>>61619865
In short;
BSD is more stable, performs, better, and is more backwards compatible with legacy software.
Linux is more popular, is more compatible with a variety of hardware, has more native software support, and receives faster updates due to its larger community.

>>61613561
Slightly better network stack, permissive license, no legal uncertainty over use of ZFS.
That's literally it.

>>61619693
BSD is from late '70s.
HURD is a collection of userspace servers. The microkernel which would be used were the GNU system actually exist is Mach.

>>61619889
>performs, better,
[Citation needed]

>>61619898
>Slightly better network stack
Isn't that a stale meme from the mid-90s?

>>61619898
>BSD is from late '70s.
BSD was developed until 1995.

>HURD is a collection of userspace servers. The microkernel which would be used were the GNU system actually exist is Mach.
They blur that distinction repeatedly in their own documentation. Technically, you're correct.

So you're 1 for 2.

>>61619898
>The microkernel which would be used were the GNU system actually exist is Mach.
No, the kernel is actually called "GNU Hurd". Yes, it's based on Mach, but it is not Mach.

>>61619944
It probably doesn't perform better in any workload that you are likely to put on it, but there are a few cases where BSD beats the living crap out of Linux. It can be significantly faster with database operations where you have hundreds, or thousands of requests for the same resources.

>>61619975
It's GNU Mach. And the HURD is garbage.

There are actual non-joke efforts for making microkernel-based operating systems. Look into Fuchsia, Genode, HelenOS, Minix3.

>>61619951
"slightly" is the key word here

>>61619961
>BSD was developed until 1995.
Yes, but I thought you meant when it was first released.

>They blur that distinction repeatedly in their own documentation. Technically, you're correct.
Might be that they refer to them as one because they are very dependent on each other.

>>61619975
>No, the kernel is actually called "GNU Hurd". Yes, it's based on Mach, but it is not Mach.
See above.
In reality, the distinction or no distinction doesn't matter that much because the HURD servers are not very portable and depend on the Mach microkernel. That's not only shitty design, it's also very bad in this particular case because Mach is a bloated mess that no one wants anything to do with.

>It probably doesn't perform better in any workload that you are likely to put on it, but there are a few cases where BSD beats the living crap out of Linux. It can be significantly faster with database operations where you have hundreds, or thousands of requests for the same resources.
I haven't used any BSD in such capacity and most of the DBs at work run on some kind of UNIX.

>>61620007
>It's GNU Mach. And the HURD is garbage.
The main difference between Mach and GNU Mach is "GNU".
And HURD is actually the less horrible part of the duo.

>There are actual non-joke efforts for making microkernel-based operating systems. Look into Fuchsia, Genode, HelenOS, Minix3.
Funny you didn't mention the only successful microkenel - QNX. Even that one is only used in embedded, which goes a long way to show how microkernels don't scale.

>>61619951
Yes it is, because every modern OS right now is using BSD's network stack.

>>61620181
>Funny you didn't mention the only successful microkenel - QNX.
Intentional. QNX is flawed. It isn't open source. But yes, quite successful in the wild. The most? The only one? I have my doubts. At one point, OKL4 was extremely popular. Billions of devices territory, IIRC.

>>61620181
>which goes a long way to show how microkernels don't scale.
It goes a long way to show microkernels are useful. It does absolutely nothing to show they don't scale.
Next, you'll tell us microkernels are slow.

>>61619639
no you r-tard, he's the reigning sigourney weaver trans-impersonator of the world

>>61613561
You want to setup a firewall or use a NAS. Everything else is garbage from freebsd. I know a dude who use netbsd for webserver with huge database. It's not the fastest thing under the sun, but do its job. Forget openbsd as it's a clusterfuck that breaks 3rd party sw.

>>61620204
Right, I forgot about L4.

>>61620221
The huge microkernel hype started sometime in the early 80s. That's almost 40 years ago. 40 years of academics assuring everyone microkernels are undoubtedly the future and monolithic kernels are deprecated.
And in those 40 years, the only thing that microkernels managed to conquer was a part of the embedded market.
Underwhelming.
As for technical reasons, those have been explained better elsewhere: http://yarchive.com/comp/microkernels.html

>>61620375
Qnx and symbian were damn popular.

>>61620375
>>And in those 40 years, the only thing that microkernels managed to conquer was a part of the embedded market.
Or rather, they ALREADY conquered a part of the embedded market.
And this is just the start.

Well some are successful. Take QNX for example, it's doing very well, BB10OS is also based on it and is the best mobile OS.

>>61620375
>explained better elsewhere
>links to Linus Torvalds opinion
-_-
>>61620429
Brace for Google's Fuchsia.

>>61620434
>Fuchsia
literally nothing

>>61620447
>literally nothing
lol?

>>61620382
Yes, and that's still the small systems market.

>>61620387
>And this is just the start.
Just Wait™: 40 Years Anniversary Edition

>>61620429
>>explained better elsewhere
>>links to Linus Torvalds opinion
>-_-
So? He has a lot of experience with kernels and the arguments he makes are sound and consistent with the available data.
Care to refute anything in particular or is this just shitposting?

>>61620454
You are an idiot if you think it will replace anything.

openbsd is the only good *bsd
- smallest attack surface
- smart community

>>61620491
>- smallest attack surface
Because no one uses it?

>>61620459
>So? He has a lot of experience with kernels
Surely, with his kernel. He does like monolithic kernels, that's well known.
>the arguments he makes are sound and consistent with the available data.
And, of course, those from Andy Tanenbaum , Gernot Heiser and so many others are not.
For those who don't know:
Andy Tanenbaum's minix book is how Linus got into the whole OS design thing.
Gernot Heiser was CTO of OKLabs, which actually successfully put microkernels in billions of devices.
Linus Torvalds is just some guy that says OpenBSD developers are masturbating monkeys, yet gets REKT by them every other week.
>>61620474
Look at its design or, if it's above you, just the people involved, moron. And yes, Google has the power to deploy it to the masses.

>>61613782
I bet he still has his powers and can use all adminprivileges. That surely was part of the deal as long as hiro allows it.

>>61620525
The have to adapt driver development for it. In the world where even linux embedded developers are rare and well paid why do you think an experimental crap can overtake it with some OS nerds working on it at github. Even wasted a bunch of time rewriting the little kernel in other language.
>Look at its design
I doubt you did it.

>>61620502
The lack of features and one liner tools with garbage performance. At least it's "elegant".

>>61620559
>The have to adapt driver development for it.
If you'd been paying attention, you'd have noticed a certain development in Android recently.
>linux embedded developers are rare and well paid
Fuchsia doesn't need or even want these.
>I doubt you did it.
But I know for certain you didn't :)

>>61620502
read any audit write-up of the bsd family, openbsd ALWAYS comes out on top

- no loadable modules
- less sys calls
- fuck compat

if security is a concern, openbsd is the best

>>61620565
>implying leaving out garbage code is bad

>>61620606
>an os don't need drivers
Opinion discarded.

File: d0a6bfd4275cb69f867454a4a6739f2eadf65b9abe49ab84088242b3131db935.jpg (29KB, 405x270px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 405x270px

>>61620606
>certain development in Android recently.

>>61620607
These people that strongly defend Linux against anything different are usually the same people that do not know anything else.
Most of those using BSD are well acquainted with more than one BSD, and plenty familiar with Linux to boot.
>>61620502
>nobody uses it!
You don't use it or know it. But, where I work we do use it. It's just a perception issue.

>>61620607
If you stick to the base system.

As soon as you start installing 3rd party software, the benefits of OpenBSD become much less clear, depending on your use case.

>>61620638
>where I work
Mom's Basement Inc.?

>>61620620 >>61620636
Yeah, you haven't been paying attention.

Project Treble.

>>61620668
>Project Treble.
Who is talking? Literally posting nothing but dick waving. :^)

>>61620620
>Linux is the only OS with drivers
>Nobody but Linux developers can write drivers
>Embedded Linux developers are well-paid and won't go work elsehwere
¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>61620697
>Linux is the only OS with drivers
Also a brainlet. Where did i wrote that? Everybody have to relearn something new that literally never used outside experimental shit.

>>61620704
>literally never used outside experimental shit.
Lol, you really are clueless.

>>61620728
So who used it for anything at all aside its developers for testing? Hurry up, because i have to work unlike you.

>>61620525
>Surely, with his kernel. He does like monolithic kernels, that's well known.
He has a lot of experience with other systems as well, which is necessary if you want to avoid making the same mistakes.

>And, of course, those from Andy Tanenbaum , Gernot Heiser and so many others are not.
Go re-read the Tannenbaum/Torvalds "Linux is deprecated" flamewar and tell me how many of Tannenbaum's forecasts actually came true?
Tannenbaum is a very knowledgeable person when it comes to operating systems and his books are second to none, but he was wrong about microkernels and it's very clear.

>For those who don't know:
>Andy Tanenbaum's minix book is how Linus got into the whole OS design thing.
So? How does that affect anything?

>Gernot Heiser was CTO of OKLabs, which actually successfully put microkernels in billions of devices.
Mostly embedded devices with specific constraints and optimizations you can do. That doesn't mean microkernels are a good idea for desktop or server OSs.

>Linus Torvalds is just some guy that says OpenBSD developers are masturbating monkeys, yet gets REKT by them every other week.
Sure, whatever helps you sleep at night.

>>61613561
ZFS, no systemd, less GPL, closer to unix philosophy.

ZFS being the only non-autistic reason.

>>61619035
I was thinking the same thing... think they've been shooped out

>>61621145
>ZFS
Available on Linux as well.
>no systemd
Slackware, Gentoo, Alpine, Void, Devuan, etc.
>less GPL
fair enough
>closer to unix philosophy
I hope this is a joke. Berkeley was bloating up Unix years before GNU even started.

>>61620826
>, but he was wrong about microkernels and it's very clear.
Nonsense. Linus might have been right to do a monolithic kernel in 1991, but that's about it.
http://www.cs.vu.nl/~ast/reliable-os/

>>61613561
jails, zfs, userland and true posix nigga

>>61621220
bullshit, if microkerneles were so good hurd would be top dog right now

>>61621239
>Still using a 1st generation microkernel
>Has not fixed the issues highlighted in the HURD critique paper
>Has 0 to 2 developers alive any given day.
Among the operating systems based on microkernel architecture, and even if only looking at the ones that are open source, the HURD is irrelevant.

>>61621327
where's your perfect posix compliant microkernel? oh wait, you don't have one because you're a virgin neet

>>61621354
>posix compliant
Moving the goalposts, aren't we?
>microkernel
I'm sure you mean microkernel based operating system. QNX Neutrino fits the bill. So do IOS and OSX.
If it was to be OSS, Anon above at >>61620181 listed
>Fuchsia, Genode, HelenOS, Minix3
All of these but HelenOS seem to offer POSIX compatibility.
HelenOS cares about it very little, as they're deliverately offering an alternative to it for research.

>>61621393
>QNX Neutrino
opinion completely discarded lmao, lemme guess you're a 2.5 year cs student?

>>61621408
>lemme guess you're a 2.5 year cs student?
Wrong
>opinion completely discarded
Why?

>>61621434
because you don't know shit about opeerating systems

>>61621220
>If you are wondering why microkernels aren't even more widely used, well, there is a lot of inertia in the system.
That's just dishonest, if not an outright lie. Microkernels used to be the hottest thing in academia and research for *decades*, what fucking inertia is he talking about?
Every given example of a successful microkernel deployment was an embedded or otherwise limited or special-purpose device. You can tweak anything to increase performance in a special niche, but it means fuck all if we're talking general-purpose systems.
That website is dated 12 May 2006, so I guess even 11 years were not enough to produce a competitive general-purpose microkernel OS.

>>61621546
>That website is dated 12 May 2006, so I guess even 11 years were not enough to produce a competitive general-purpose microkernel OS.
Look at Fuchsia instead. That one isn't being written by students and the occassional EU FP7 funded researcher.

>>61621546
>I guess even 11 years were not enough to produce a competitive general-purpose microkernel OS.
What project do you know of which is trying to do that?
>>61621564
Despite its research nature and lack of funding, MINIX3's HEAD builds and runs a good % of pkgsrc, and not only is competitive, but no other system does even come close in fault tolerance. Do not belittle MINIX3 just because their goals and priorities do not align with yours.

I'll just leave this here.
http://blog.darknedgy.net/technology/2016/01/01/0/
>microkernels are slow
#2
>microkernels do not scale
#7
>microkernels are academic shit nobody is using out there
#8

>>61621564
IIRC Fuchsia is oriented towards IoT/embedded and smartphones, maybe Chromebooks.
I hope someone tries to make a desktop OS out of it, just to see how it compares against Linux/BSDs.

>>61621613
>What project do you know of which is trying to do that?
You mean aside of MINIX3 which the entire article was about?
Mach, GNU, and L4 are the best known examples.

>>61621747
>GNU
Is the only project among those you listed which is trying to do that. For some definition of trying.

>>61621747
>You mean aside of MINIX3 which the entire article was about?
Yet MINIX3 isn't going for general purpose.
>http://wiki.minix3.org/doku.php?id=goals
>MINIX 1 and 2 were intended as teaching tools; MINIX 3 adds the new goal of being usable as a serious system on resource-limited and embedded computers and for applications requiring high reliability.

>>61621747
>IIRC Fuchsia is oriented towards IoT/embedded and smartphones, maybe Chromebooks.
Keep in mind Google has not made any statement on Fuchsia's purpose. It remains unknown.
There's only guesses from the source code. Which happens to look extremely flexible.

>>61616980
>but for users who want the next great thing
Sometimes the next great thing is what you already have right now.

>>61622608
Change is for the insecure

>>61613610
>been move to official servers
4chan was never hosted in mac minis you baited retard.

>>61613596
Do people actually believe this?

Can someone explain the difference / relationship between GNU's Mach and HURD clusterfuck. Which one is actually the kernel?

File: 1484543397967.jpg (33KB, 290x271px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 290x271px

>>61613561
Uuuh sauce on pic?

>>61624608
sarah snyder

ig: sarahfuckingsnyder

>>61624608
jaden smith's ex gf, she cucked him with another niggers

File: sarah-snyder-cheating-on-jaden-smith-ftr.jpg (45KB, 600x501px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x501px

Now that's irony

File: simple-truth-logo.png (17KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 400x400px

>>61613643
The kind of girls who would be impressed by this, /g/ would probably not be into.

The kind of girls /g/ would be into, would probably not be impressed by this.

>>61624503
The entire point of microkernels is to move stuff from kernel space to user space. Since the removed functionality is still essential to the rest of the OS, it has to go somewhere - usually to a standard process running in userspace and called "server".

Mach is the microkernel and Hurd is a collection of servers that run in userspace and provide services such as filesystems, networking, etc.

File: 1487025371678.png (273KB, 518x700px) Image search: [Google]

273KB, 518x700px

>>61624644
Much obliged anon
>>61624651
A night rider.....that's damn shame.

>>61613561
>Is there any serious reason to use BSD over Linux?

Ken Thompson went back to his alma mater, UC Berkeley and installed Unix. This would eventually turn into BSD Unix.

Ken Thompson > Linus Torvalds
Ken Thompson > Richard Stallman

BSD > Linux

File: moot_mac_mini.png (474KB, 1220x608px) Image search: [Google]

474KB, 1220x608px

>>61624365

>>61628338
Because everything you see and read on the internet is true...

On a side note I'm running battlefield 1 just fine on a gtx 1070 and a Pentium MMX.

File: f79f8a35cc3456b335a823ba46e5218b.jpg (946KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

946KB, 1920x1080px

The guy, I don't remember his name but he funded this site.
The guy, he's your friend.

>>61628394
What happened to her pants? Why is she wearing underwear like that?

>>61628386
just face it lad; windows is hot trash and you are a fool for using it. You might as well mail Bill Gates a flash drive with all of your home-made cuck porn.

>>61628442
Don't you dare insult mai waifu

>>61618958
>trashes Americans on a site written by an American

>>61628472
I'm confused

>>61630358
An american ripping off a Japanese*