Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2005 01:48:59 -0800 From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> To: <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Freebsd vs. linux Message-ID: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNOEGIFAAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> In-Reply-To: <382521231.20050213212528@wanadoo.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Anthony > Atkielski > Sent: Sunday, February 13, 2005 12:25 PM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: Freebsd vs. linux > > > Vulpes Velox writes: > > > I think the problem there is ppl make largely pointless differences > > between the two... the only difference between a server and desktop, > > is a desktop needs support sound cards and a the kernel level stuff > > for GL. > > There are dramatic differences between servers and desktops, and they > should not be confused. Anything that runs well as a desktop Anything that is COST EFFECTIVE and that runs well as a desktop.. The main difference between a desktop and a server is a server needs beefy disk I/O or beefy CPU power or both, while a desktop needs beefy video and can often make due with piss-poor disk I/O. While a desktop is USUALLY optimized for the video, and saves money by using poor I/O, and a server vis-versa, if you had unlimited funds you could certainly put a hardware RAID card on your desktop and have an equivalent to the server. Ted
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNOEGIFAAA.tedm>