> One of the best features of FreeBSD is that it can be used as a general-purpose operating system. That means that FreeBSD can be used as a server, as an embedded system, or in networking.
Same for Linux.
> FreeBSD provides simplified software management with the help of its packaging system and the ports collection.
Not a ports experts but the difference between ports and Gentoo portage does not really seem that big, certainly nothing of FreeBSD itself makes it more suitable to working with ports than a Linux kernel. And there is guix and nix also which really should cover most software management needs and flexibility anyone has.
> One of the many great advantages of FreeBSD is that it allows you to customize the operating system, according to your needs.
Again Gentoo, nix and guix covers this quite well.
> You don’t need lots of cores – but you can definitely run it on huge multicore systems, can easily run a highly graphical interface, or choose the simpler way; FreeBSD will support you either way.
Linux definitely does scale up and down, maybe FreeBSD scales down a bit smaller than Linux, but I would have to see numbers to back this up, and I don't think it is that significant in difference.
> FreeBSD has been ported to a variety of instruction set architectures.
Again this is not something unique to FreeBSD and Linux has a proven track record of portability.
> FreeBSD includes two native file systems, the Unix File System (UFS) and the Z File System (ZFS).
I guess "native" ZFS is the closest it comes to a UVP, but given Linux support for ZFS is quite good to the point where ZFS on root is possible I'm nto sure it qualifies.
Not saying FreeBSD is not great, but not sure it really has any unique value propositions.