Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1998 08:53:36 -0500 From: Jaime Kikpole <jaime@snowmoon.com> To: Al Davison <shonnel7@pdq.net> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Windows NT Message-ID: <367E52DD.2819E0E0@snowmoon.com> References: <000f01be2cc8$c9a64130$01dfdfdf@al-davis>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> Al Davison wrote: > Can programs that operate on Windows NT operate on FreeBSD? Is FreeBSD > comparable or better than NT? Using the wine package, you can run a certain number of Win32 and Win16 programs. If you're going to load FreeBSD 3.0, you can run many (most?) MS-DOS programs. Note that the wine system is still in development and you probably don't want to use it for mission critical apps. As to your second question, let me tell you a few facts and let you decide. FreeBSD is more configurable, has better support for the Internet's open standards, tends to have visibly better performance on the same hardware, has better logging of things like reasons for crashes and reboots, ppp status and errors, and user actions. It never costs more than $70 (and that's with 4 CDs and a think book) and can cost as little as $0.00. These costs are legal, not pirated. Windows NT has a few advantages in supporting Windows NT Workstation, but not many. Windows NT is more popular with "pointy haired bosses" and you have to justify this choice less often. Of course, what you save in time spent on justification is MORE than lost in time spent on trying to fix it. Windows NT has a larger following, so turning to a friend for help is more likely to be successful. On the other hand, if you don't mind using the FreeBSD handbook and FAQ (see http://www.freebsd.org... they're both free), email, usenet, and IRC for technical support, you're more likely to get a solid answer. This is based off of 3 years experience in Unix (NetBSD, FreeBSD, Ultrix, Solaris, etc.) and 8 months of Windows NT consulting plus 9 months of Windows NT user-level experience. And trust me, the experience in Windows NT Server consulting was not by choice. Oh, and consider this: I replaced a $12000-$15000 Windows NT web proxy and mail server with a $250 FreeBSD proxy once. (This was due to a problem with the NT box and was a temporary measure.) No one noticed! Well, OK, I received a single complaint that the email server was down, but no one noticed a speed hit on the proxy. The NT server had 192MB of RAM, 3 HDs, two 100Base NICs, 2 Pentium IIs, etc. The FreeBSD box was a spare 486 that I had. It had 66MHz, 16MB of RAM, and one 10Base-T NIC. *I* prefer FreeBSD and am using it at my job. The choice is your's of course. NT has better "butt-covering" value, but you'll have to explain why it crashed. FreeBSD can run for months or even years without problems if you have stable hardware. Good luck, Jaime 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?367E52DD.2819E0E0>