Date: Sat, 9 May 1998 13:08:47 +0200 (SAT) From: Johann Visagie <wjv@cityip.co.za> To: egravel@elr346.ateng.az.honeywell.com (Emmanuel Gravel) Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux Message-ID: <E0yY7Ul-0002Bk-00@ns.cityip.co.za> In-Reply-To: <3551B277.5C40A51A@elr346.ateng.az.honeywell.com> from Emmanuel Gravel at "May 7, 98 01:09:11 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Emmanuel Gravel wrote: > > I have installed Linux on one of my computers and am learning to use > it. But I have also been hearing of FreeBSD for quite a while and am > now starting to inquire about it. It seems that FreeBSD is more > reliable for networking applications (if I believe the info given on > the few websites I've visited). I also know that there is a friendly > rivalry between Linux and FreeBSD users (what, you're using [...]? Get > a real OS!) But through all that, I'd like to get a no-bullshit > comparison between both, just a few major differences that would make > a person chose one over the other (kinda like saying, if you only want > to use software, get a Mac, but if you want to program and play inside > the machine, get an Amiga). If you could send me a small list of > different uses for each OS (which would be better as a workstation, > as a web server/proxy/firewall, etc, etc...) I'd very much appreciate > it. As you can imagine, this question gets asked on this list all the time. Many people have even websites up listing some of the more informative replies. Since you asked this question in a more intelligent manner than most ;-)), I'll give you my take on matters. For the record, I have a number of both FreeBSD and Linux machines running in several commercial environments. My short summary (that I've given before) is this: FreeBSD is Berkeley Unix that happen to run on x86 hardware; Linux is an x86 OS that happens to be POSIX-like. Linux has more users and will always have more "bleeding edge" features. Sometimes you want to do something really strange and probably not RFC-compliant to your network. Linux is often the only thing that can do it. FreeBSD has a stable development crew and a well-maintained source tree. As such, it is a pleasure to administer multiple servers (many in remote locations) running FreeBSD, since they're all very standard. For the same reasons, development under FreeBSD is also a pleasure. Linux supports just about everything you can possibly plug into a PC. With FreeBSD, it seems a design decision has been taken to provide support for higher spec hardware by preference. Something like, "We're aiming at the server market. Nobody is going to use XXX technology in a _real_ commercial server anyway, so we're not going to spend too much time on it." Linux, on the other hand, sometimes seems to have _less_ support for higher-end hardware. Witness the broken midlevel SCSI drivers. Claims of greater stability or performance are often very subjective; however, from my experience, FreeBSD often has a definite case in claiming these things over Linux. To summarise: If you're want to set up a solid Internet server which might have to go for months without attention, try FreeBSD. If you want ao "power" workstation to play with everything and anything new in the Unix world, maybe try Linux. In the end though, I can only advise you to get your hands on an old PC, install FreeBSD, and play with it for a while... :-) -- V Johann Visagie | Email: wjv@CityIP.co.za | Tel: +27 21 419-7878 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?E0yY7Ul-0002Bk-00>