Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:53:49 +0300
From:      Cem Kayali <cemkayali@eticaret.com.tr>
To:        Kim Attree <kim.attree@playsafesa.com>
Cc:        Michal <michal@sharescope.co.uk>, "misc@openbsd.org" <misc@openbsd.org>, "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Open Vs Free BSD
Message-ID:  <4A3B602D.7060506@eticaret.com.tr>
In-Reply-To: <00265389C30B444288C246DF37651D0C249024DD1B@server-02.playsafesa.com>
References:  <735E59909DEB44AF92825EA7C65CF430@ionicoffice.ionic.co.uk> <00265389C30B444288C246DF37651D0C249024DD1B@server-02.playsafesa.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

Hi,

Well basically, you need to pay for additional security implementations, 
and this sometimes costs decrease in performance --- though i think i 
can always pay for that...

Regards,
Cem

Kim Attree, 06/19/09 12:16:
> You'll struggle to find a proper apples-to-apples test to prove/disprove those
> statements, but commonly held BSD Lore states:
>
> FreeBSD offers the best performance, and it supports the most software. It's
> commonly used for web or file servers and desktops. Also, FreeBSD is more
> actively developed than the others.
>
> OpenBSD focuses on security. It runs on more platforms than FreeBSD, but less
> than NetBSD. Since security is the primary goal, it's excellent for routers
> and secure-by-default servers. Popular desktop applications like Mozilla and
> OpenOffice are supported, but don't expect every other Linux/UNIX program to
> work.
>
> NetBSD runs on just about anything. That's it's primary goal. Since I don't
> have any weird hardware, I've never had a use for NetBSD.
>
> Kim Attree
> IT Manager
> Playsafe  South Africa
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
> [mailto:owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Michal
> Sent: 19 June 2009 10:48 AM
> To: misc@openbsd.org; freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
> Subject: Open Vs Free BSD
>
> Someone once said this too me
>
>
>
> "Comparing FreeBSD and OpenBSD, FreeBSD is generally better at disk-related
> I/O whereas OpenBSD handles net-I/O better. No test has been carried out to
> prove this though."
>
>
>
> Every offence to the person which said this, but they are not the best admin
> ever, though they like to think they are (the worst kind I think)
>
>
>
> Can anyone shed any light, the reason I ask is we where debating about a
> network and he said OpenBSD on the network (routers firewall etc) and
> FreeBSD as the app servers (mail, files etc etc), which I can see makes
> sense.but without having evidence it's pointless making a claim.
>
>
>
> Thanks :-)
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>
>
>   




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4A3B602D.7060506>