Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2001 00:05:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Marco Radzinschi <marco@radzinschi.com> To: FreeBDS-Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: OT: I'm sticking with FreeBSD Message-ID: <20011021230814.Y1040-100000@mail.radzinschi.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello: I realize this is slightly off topic for questions, but I'll post it anyway. :-) I started using open source operating systems about a year ago, mostly as a matter of necessity. I needed (wanted) a mail server, and the only spare computer I had for the task was a Pentium 166 MMX machine with 64 MB RAM. Now, I figured Windows NT would not run very well on this box, especially with exchange server. I also didn't have any money to buy a monitor for this machine, so all administration had to be done "remotely," and even PC Anywhere can't make NT shine in this area. I figured I'd give Red Hat Linux a try, and it actually ran quite fast on that slow machine. On the other hand, I was not very impressed with all the garbage that Red Hat came with, as it took me half an hour just to *deselect* things to get the install down to about 300 MB. I ran red hat for two months, and then tried FreeBSD, since I was told it had a small footprint. I also figured that if it is good enough for Yahoo it would be good enough for me. As I am sure you all know, the full FreeBSD install was about 300 MB, with no extra junk, which pleased me immensely. By full install I mean full *server* install: no X Window system. I've been running FreeBSD for many months now, and it seems to be a far more coherent system than the Linux distros, with Red Hat in particular. All this without a single crash, I might add. :-) Unlike some of the Linux advocates, I realize that Unix on the Intel desktop will not take off unless Microsoft wants it to, and I will stick with my Windows 2000 workstation. I am quite happy with the tons of applications that I have available on Windows 2000, even though the OS is not as stable as it should be. However, I will say that I will *NEVER* run a Windows NT server, as it contains too much garbage, which makes it too unstable to run as a server. FreeBSD does not have sound support by default, and it doesn't install any GUI by default. More importantly, it has the good old Novell Netware approach of installing the minumum and adding what is needed. That is the way it should be. Servers do not need sound cards, and they certainly do not need a GUI. One might say that I have not gotten the full Unix experience because I do not and probably will not run a full X workstation. I like my command line though, and FreeBSD suits me well in this respect. It is exactly what I want in a server environment. My thanks to everyone on the FreeBSD team - your work is greatly appreciated. Marco Radzinschi E-Mail: marco@radzinschi.com AOL IM: CrackedBoy Running FreeBSD 4.4-RELEASE i386 11:08PM up 9:17, 1 user, load averages: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011021230814.Y1040-100000>