You do realize that Netflix uses FreeBSD, right? That a good chunk of NAS builds, diy or not, use FreeBSD? That high performance network solutions often use FreeBSD because of what is commonly seen as a better/more mature network stack?
Having a smaller user base than the world's most used kernel (Linux) doesn't mean it has a small user base in absolute terms. And being a smaller kernel in lines of code is certainly a positive thing.
This pattern repeats, with OS's smaller than FreeBSD having good reason to be chosen in production.
Fun fact: Apple used NetBSD on their Airport product series.
I'm not sure you should plainly compare FreeBSD on a limited choice of Hardware doing server things with "a general purpose GUI desktop OS".
OP didn't say FreeBSD was bad in my reading, but as a somewhat irregular user you just notice 1000 papercuts (which are not the OS's fault per se for the most part) but which detract from the overall experience. Every nth software package you use for the first time needs a (small, 3-line) patch which is mostly because the people develop on Linux. Sometimes it's better if they develop on OSX, sometimes it doesn't matter.
> Today, FreeBSD is used by many IT companies such as IBM, Nokia, Juniper Networks, and NetApp to build their products.[16][17] Certain parts of Apple's Mac OS X operating system are based on FreeBSD.[18] Both the PlayStation 3 and Nintendo Switch operating system also borrow certain components from FreeBSD,[7][8] while the PlayStation 4 operating system is derived from FreeBSD 9.[19] Netflix,[20] WhatsApp,[21] and FlightAware[22] are also examples of large, successful and heavily network-oriented companies which are running FreeBSD.
Software that everybody uses can be affected by terrible bugs - Heartbleed couldn't have happened otherwise - so what is the magic level of usage needed to avoid bugs and be stable?
