Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX

WHICH BSD ????

<< < (2/2)

runkpock:
FreeBSD is good for a  workstation, and a  server.
NetBSD is great for multi-platform support. Also a
great server  and *snicker* workstation. OpenBSD is great as a  cup coaster (install cdrom). I really
cant belive the (Free|Net)BSD numbers are that low,
i doubt the "sanity" of those numbers, at my office
there are 2 linux boxes, and 1 FreeBSD and 1 NetBSD.
Do your self a favor and learn BSD Unix. And I am
running linux right now, so I'll stop talking.

Siplus:
i started using linux when i got here not too long ago, so that tells ya that i'm very new. i tried to download FreeBSD 5 i think, but the iso doesn't work  :(

i don't see why bsd should be doing bad. how can it be that different from linux, which is currently has an inclining userbase?

choasforages:
i can't wait until FreeBSD 5 stabilizes and gets a few minor bugs kicked out of it, and gets put back to full speed/*operating systems do not run fast with lots and lots of debug code and such*/, not to mention a few more features. have you seen devfs under it, or seen the way /dev works on osx? it works and makes my life easyeir/*but it still needs some work autodetecting partitions on a jaz drive*/

Calum:
netcraft doesn't seem to realise that the *BSD stuff that's going on now does not need a market share.

*BSD are really stable and secure environments, so they are intrinsically suited for anywhere where a rock solid computer is needed, perhaps with not much user interaction. these machines will always be needed, and *BSD will always be being developed, by its developers who are admirably devoted to *BSD.

i have only tried freeBSD, and even then only a little, but it looked really good, if a little difficult for a linux user (NOT guru) to figure out at first.

Personally i have heard go with FreeBSD over the other four or 5 major BSDs because it is more general purpose than the rest.

and siplus, it's simply because of two things, and both boil down to *BSD people not giving a shit if they conform to people's expectations. first reason, the *BSD stuff is not compatible with stallman's idea of real Free software, and since stallman is cheif Free software evangelist in the world, *BSD doesn't get as much promotion as other systems. second reason: *BSD has a lot of initials in its name, nobody's made the effort to standardise it, to write nice pretty windows-like installers, or to make it in any way palatable to people who have not already used unix or BSD in some way. this is not to say BSD is not great, from all accounts it is excellent, but it doesn't give a shit if anybody knows that!
and that's why linux is the poster child of Free software, and *BSD is the ugly genius that gets kept in the cellar out of sight of the neighbours.

[ March 27, 2003: Message edited by: Calum: crusader for justice & peace ]

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page