While I get the author's reasoning, it makes me wonder at what scale, portability and level of automation and disposability all of this is done.
Even if an OS is 'better', a VM with a short lifetime will generally be 'good enough' very quickly. If you add a very large ecosystem and lots of support (both open source and community as well as commercial support) and existing knowledge, FreeBSD doesn't immediately come to mind as a great option.
If I were to go for an 'appliance' style system, that's where I would likely consider FreeBSD at some point, especially with ZFS snapshots and (for me) the reliably and fast BTX loader. Pumping out BSD images isn't hard (great distro tools!) and complete system updates (due to the mentioned "one team does the whole release") are a breeze as well. This is of course something we can do with systemd and things like debootstrap too, but from a OS-image-as-deployable perspective this will do just fine.
Even if an OS is 'better', a VM with a short lifetime will generally be 'good enough' very quickly. If you add a very large ecosystem and lots of support (both open source and community as well as commercial support) and existing knowledge, FreeBSD doesn't immediately come to mind as a great option.
If I were to go for an 'appliance' style system, that's where I would likely consider FreeBSD at some point, especially with ZFS snapshots and (for me) the reliably and fast BTX loader. Pumping out BSD images isn't hard (great distro tools!) and complete system updates (due to the mentioned "one team does the whole release") are a breeze as well. This is of course something we can do with systemd and things like debootstrap too, but from a OS-image-as-deployable perspective this will do just fine.