In a normal world, the article should read "I installed bsd, and just used my computer to do something useful."
I also posted about that I tried Linux (Ubuntu), FreeBSD, and OpenBSD on the laptop before deciding on OpenBSD. It wasn't made out of stubbornness.
It was simply the right choice for me for that laptop. And I shared my experience getting it up to a state I was used to with my previous Linux workstation (that this laptop replaced).
(I also have installed OpenBSD before and found the whole process actually quite complicated and documentation insufficient. YMMV)
My experience or expectations others may not share. I didn't truly consider that when writing the blog post.
The stuff I complain about is probably less than 5% of the entire experience. So, almost all the time OpenBSD is out of my way and I go about doing what I did with a Linux workstation.
It is mostly web browser and terminals for me, with random apps here and there like gimp or something.
I'm learning kernel and assembly programming and penetration testing, so my use case probably differs from the average user experience, I'd guess.
I'm just a geek enjoying geeking out :)
I love the BSDs but for daily use on a laptop I would prefer macOS by far. How is failing to perfectly fulfill a niche it’s not designed for “what’s wrong” with OpenBSD?
I think in both cases, people could stand to pay a little bit of attention to what hardware they're using. A lot of people aren't used to this because their hardware comes with an OS that is ostensibly "certified" for it, in the way that bugs in the integration can sometimes be warranty claims. Those manufacturers pay attention to whether or not drivers are available for Windows to support the hardware they're shipping, but consumers experience it as "it just works".