[jspann]

> NetBSD sits in the middle. It is a relatively small, clean, and simple OS.

The "build.sh" system for compilation is so easy to use for compiling your own toyOS that I initially felt like I had done something wrong. Linux is a bigger, better funded, wider documented project but the overall ease of specifying output type for a boot image and what platform I was developing for was the second deciding factor for me. The first was being able to compile it (with no weird extra steps) on my Mac (pre Apple Silicon).

In undergrad it became my hackable OS of choice if I wanted to compile something for my old Mac, a server for my bike, or some incredibly niche computer I found by accident. When I had questions, I asked the IRC group. For me, it was a great introduction by practice of the different parts of an OS.

[wannacboatmovie]

> some incredibly niche computer I found by accident

I used to think this, but leave it to me to disprove...

Had an Intel Atom board that would only boot Linux and... OpenBSD. NetBSD (and a number of other OSes) would hang when attempting to load the kernel and refuse to boot - likely due to some firmware bug.

[kees99]

> Intel Atom (...) NetBSD (and a number of other OSes) would (...) refuse to boot

Was it one of those cheap tablets/netbooks that shipped with fully-64-bit-capable CPU (Atom Z3735F) but with dreaded 32-bit-only UEFI firmware?

GRUB can boot NetBSD there, although it's a bit of a hassle to set up.