Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 09:21:19 +0800 From: Greg Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org> To: Scott Emerson Longley <emerson@WPI.EDU> Cc: "Jon M. Ernster" <jernster@dumbfounded.net>, freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Making the all-important switch Message-ID: <20030126012119.GA3641@sydney.worldwide.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.4.44.0301251037580.26050-100000@emdall.WPI.EDU> <Pine.OSF.4.44.0301251049280.26050-100000@emdall.WPI.EDU> References: <20030125132533.GF1042@sydney.worldwide.lemis.com> <Pine.OSF.4.44.0301251037580.26050-100000@emdall.WPI.EDU> <1043507676.895.24.camel@majorly> <Pine.OSF.4.44.0301251049280.26050-100000@emdall.WPI.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Saturday, 25 January 2003 at 10:54:43 -0500, Scott Emerson Longley wrote: > > > On 25 Jan 2003, Jon M. Ernster wrote: > >> On Sat, 2003-01-25 at 06:25, Greg Lehey wrote: >>> On Saturday, 25 January 2003 at 0:27:38 -0500, Scott Emerson Longley wrote: >>>> I'm about ready to ditch Windoze for good and I'm spending what little >>>> free time I can find to prepare by researching FreeBSD. Currently, I run >>>> two OpenBSD servers and use a 3rd OpenBSD system (a laptop) as a portable >>>> terminal. I have 3 years of *nix (OpenBSD, true64, linux) experience, but >>>> only one years experience as an administrator (OpenBSD). My main desktop >>>> system is W2k and I am sick and tired of it. I have decided to replace W2k >>>> with FreeBSD, as it is more suited to desktop use than OpenBSD. Now that >>>> I'm done babbling, here's my question: >>> >>> Interesting question. What makes you think that FreeBSD is more >>> suited to the desktop than OpenBSD? >> >> I think there's a difference in ease of use in general; ports - they're >> divided up into more general directories in FreeBSD as for OpenBSD has a >> bunch of ports shoved into directories. With FreeBSD you know you're >> running the most current ports (If you aren't, something may not work >> and that's the first thing you should check.) I run FreeBSD on the >> laptop I type this out on, where as my router runs OpenBSD and I don't >> think I'd run OpenBSD for anything else. > > Choosing the right OS for a computer with a specific use is like > choosing the right tool for the job; it's essential. Both OpenBSD and FreeBSD are general-purpose operating systems. There are various levels of "right". In many cases, both FreeBSD and OpenBSD are "right". As you get more demanding, you have fewer choices, until finally there are none. On Saturday, 25 January 2003 at 10:48:40 -0500, Scott Emerson Longley wrote: > On Sat, 25 Jan 2003, Greg Lehey wrote: >> Interesting question. What makes you think that FreeBSD is more >> suited to the desktop than OpenBSD? > > The FreeBSD ports tree is much larger. I cannot find nearly enough > software to run on OpenBSD without a lot of headaches. Also, the OpenBSD > community & developers are less sympathetic to desktop users. I suppose that's a difference :-) >>> What major differences will I encounter (post-install) as a new >>> FreeBSD user/administrator that my OpenBSD experience wouldn't >>> have prepared me for? >> >> It's difficult to quantify what differences you're likely to see. >> Installation will probably seem easier. > > I've got to disagree there. Nothing against FreeBSD, but the OpenBSD > install process is shorter and easier than just about > everything. However, if you're referring to the initial setup in > general, that's great news. Yes, it depends on what you mean by "install". IIRC you can't configure X during the OpenBSD install, for example. In recent versions of FreeBSD, you can install a complete, functional desktop from sysinstall. Greg -- See complete headers for address and phone numbers To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030126012119.GA3641>