Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 16 Dec 1999 09:37:59 -0800 (PST)
From:      Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com>
To:        current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Linux vs. OpenBSD vs. FreeBSD vs. NetBSD (fwd)
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.4.05.9912160937410.23583-100000@semuta.feral.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

fyi


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 1999 12:15:48 -0500 (EST)
From: Paul B. Brown <pbrown@btechnet.com>
Reply-To: axp-list@redhat.com
To: axp-list@redhat.com
Subject: Re: Linux vs. OpenBSD vs. FreeBSD vs. NetBSD
Resent-Date: 16 Dec 1999 17:15:54 -0000
Resent-From: axp-list@redhat.com
Resent-cc: recipient list not shown: ;


> Is there a handy collection of arguments over which OS is better?

Hummmm  . . . . this is a much debated topic.  In a nutshell:

Linux:

   1. More prevalent
   2. More support
   3. More software ported
   4. Multi-platform: Intel, Alpha, Sparc, Mac, PowerPC, etc.
   5. GPLed

   Even though I think Linux needs further tweaking to become as high
   stress as FreeBSD, I still believe it is the best bang for the buck.
   There is more interest in this OS than any of the other "free" OSes.
   This is a plus and a minus.  The plus is that it will continue to
   advance as an OS and a production platform.  The minus is that now
   business needs may begin to drive Linux and that will skew the
   original intent of Linux and it's reason for being as good as it is.

   I've been talking to some Systems Operations boys at NASA HQ in
   Washington, DC who have done (and continue to do) testing on the
   "free" OSes as stable platforms for research and production at NASA.
   They found that even now, FreeBSD or OpenBSD are their choice either
   because of stability or speed.  I found that interesting given some
   of the claims I've seem on this list, and others, that Linux is now as
   stable and high performance as FreeBSD on Intel. The NASA boys don't
   think so.

FreeBSD:

   1. Higher performance especially in the network stack.
   2. Can run any Linux application using emulator.
   3. BSDL
   4. Intel Only: This means the OS is tweaked for max performance.

   This is a very stable, very robust, high stress-capable OS for Intel
   platforms only.  If you want to get the max out of your production
   Intel platform, use FreeBSD.  Yahoo does.  The choice at NASA HQ.

NetBSD:

   1. Runs on a lot of old hardware: PDP, VAX, 3B2, etc.
   2. Very stable.
   3. BSDL.

   This one is used if you have some old hardware lying around and want
   to get it functional again.  This is great for older companies,
   Universities, and research facilities.

OpenBSD:

   1. Runs on a lot of old hardware: PDP, VAX, 3B2, etc.
   2. More secure out of the box than any other xBSD.
   3. Offshoot of NetBSD.
   4. Very stable.
   5. BSDL.

   The same as NetBSD except it's security features are it's main selling
   point.

There is my $0.02 worth.  :-)

Paul

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul B. Brown                                  pbrown@btechnet.com
President
Brown Technologies Network, Inc.               http://www.btechnet.com/

Systems and Applications Design, Development, Deployment, and Maintenance
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
To unsubscribe: send e-mail to axp-list-request@redhat.com with
'unsubscribe' as the subject.  Do not send it to axp-list@redhat.com



To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9912160937410.23583-100000>