Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!fu-berlin.de!zib-berlin.de!news.tu-chemnitz.de!irz401!uriah.heep!news From: j@uriah.heep.sax.de (J Wunsch) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux Date: 19 May 1996 09:34:15 GMT Organization: Private BSD site, Dresden Lines: 57 Message-ID: <4nmpun$i6@uriah.heep.sax.de> References: <318FA7CB.8D8@hkstar.com> <4n2btc$1vs@rabbit.augusta.de> <DrI7pE.pF@iquest.net> <4nlrhs$lqr@news1.halcyon.com> Reply-To: joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de (Joerg Wunsch) NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.heep.sax.de Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: knews 0.9.6 X-Phone: +49-351-2012 669 X-PGP-Fingerprint: DC 47 E6 E4 FF A6 E9 8F 93 21 E0 7D F9 12 D6 4E dorian@chinook.halcyon.com (Aaron Mitchell) wrote: > : : If you donīt know, try FreeBSD! I think, Linux is a toy ... > : Nice explaination. I use Linux, but I'm considering trying > FreeBSD, however, : comments like your's do NOT make me want to try > it. So please, keep in mind that we (the developers of FreeBSD) DON'T appreciate comments of this kind either! Actually, one of the most active developers (John Dyson) has often stated here that he's running Linux often enough to benchmark both systems for personal use, just to ensure that FreeBSD doesn't fall behind in any area. Comments like the above are often done by relative newbies to FreeBSD, who feel that they have to defend their decision against themselves and everybody else. (``I'm using it. I must be right, OK?'') > I don't feel, however, than Linux is worthless or useless. I > just prefer FreeBSD as a network server. Linux is by far (I consider) a > better desktop and devolpment system. I've always had an easier time > working with Linux when trying to connect to DOS based machines, and the > 1.3 kernels are absolutley full of really exciting options. I think that > the devolpment of linux is aiming towards compatibilty, ease of use, and a > wide range of options. I think FreeBSD is more aimed towards stabilty of > code, even if that means less options and features, and network > performance. Well, if connection to DOS-based is your major consideration when it comes to a desktop machine, Linux might indeed be better suited for this purpose for you. (It's irrelevant for me, i don't have any DOS partition on any disk, so this is no point for me either. But i bet this doesn't surprise you. :) It seems that there are only a few contributors to FreeBSD who are eager to get the DOS interconnection into a better shape, far less than those who are interested to improve VM subsystems etc. ;) I would be interested in learning what else makes you feel that Linux is better suited for the desktop. (Seriously -- i don't have the time to install and maintain a Linux system myself, and a lovelessly installed one won't be much help either.) You are right, our biggest concern is stability, security, and other so-called ``serious'' things. If a decision is to be made between stability and added features, stability will always win in the FreeBSD camp. (There are also other considerations like licensing problems. We like to make a clear distinction between GPL'ed code and the rest of the system, so it's possible to use FreeBSD for embedded controllers, or even to sell it to customers who think: ``No cost -- no worth''.) -- cheers, J"org joerg_wunsch@uriah.heep.sax.de -- http://www.sax.de/~joerg/ -- NIC: JW11-RIPE Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)