Because the potential upside is tiny. There's nothing in FreeBSD that I can't get in Linux that I have any particular need for. I'm sure there are features that are important and valuable to other people, but that doesn't help me.

That leaves near 0 benefit, and some unknown non-zero cost and risk associated with reduced experience with it, potential application incompatibilities and other unknowns, as well as a time cost of re-imaging servers and re-deploying vm's that would put tens of thousands on the cost side.

That's not exactly a cost-benefit situation that justifies spending time considering it.

If the FreeBSD guys develop something so amazingly much better than Linux that we could save lots of money by switching, that could change. I don't see that as very likely, though.

As it is, FreeBSD vs Linux is a bit like Coke vs Pepsi: If you have a preference, and its available, pick it, but it makes very little sense to expend lots of effort to replace one with the other.

In FreeBSD land, nobody wastes eons of time hacking out bad code experiments like systemd and then arguing between themselves on whether to distribute them.

It's a stable system you can rely on, year by year. That's not a small upside for a server platform.

This is precisely why I recently trashed my last few Linux machines and moved them over to FreeBSD. Well to be honest it was because it's absolutely tiresome not having a cohesive well documented system to rely on without the politics and collection of dickhead advocates and pseudo-religious leaders around my ass like mosquitos. Oh and ZFS, MAC, audit, decent ACL support, binary upgrades etc.

However I agree that there is little motivation to move if what you have works. I did mine during a hardware refresh.