Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 12:13:26 +0200 From: "Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg" <listsub@401.cx> To: Aaron Peterson <aaron@alpete.com> Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: freebsd vs. linux - educated opinions wanted Message-ID: <3EC8AE46.90009@401.cx> References: <E19Gq1F-0006QW-00@host02.ipowerweb.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Aaron Peterson wrote: > i am looking for educated opinions about the following: *snip* > > 1. There is better hardware support for linux, and more features > because there are more developers. Do not confuse quality with quantity. More drivers does not mean better drivers, just as more developers does not mean better code. More often then not, the opposite is true. > 2. Linux code is often not as well written as freebsd because > freebsd developers are more unified, focused and strict. Might be true to some extent, but its not a general rule. There are parts of the linux source that is just terrible, but then again Im sure parts of the FreeBSD code isnt as clean and strict as it should be. > 3. freeBSD is more secure I would prefer to say that FreeBSD is often more secure *by default*. No os is more secure then the admins make it. Im sure an experienced linux hacker can tighten down a linux box to be virtually bullet proof, just as a newbie freebsd user can make his box as secure as an unpatched w2k running the first version of IIS. However, if you are a total newbie, FreeBSD is probably a better start since it will give you a good starting point, security wise. But this varies extremely depending on distribution. Red Hat is as secure as a Windows 98 box, while others like debian or slackware is really good. > 4. freeBSD is more stable By my experience, yes. The FreeBSD VM is the best there is, especially under load. The linux VM has made a lot of progress, but I dont know if they have come all the way yet. > > what does linux have that freebsd doesn't? Hype, hype and lots of hype. A fat penguin logo. > what does freebsd have that linux doesn't? A very mature code base and, IMHO, a more organized way of doing things. The goodguy to a-hole ratio is probably a little bit better in the bsd community. A truly free license. The fact that you dont have to pay money for linux does not make it free! > what are the security issues that should be acknowledged when > deciding which to use for something mission critical in a > production environment? how does one measure/compare stability, > and which comes out on top? You will have to make your own opinion. I have used both Linux and FreeBSD for 6+ years now, and I know which one I prefer. The strange thing is, that the more educated and experienced I get with Linux, the more I dislike it. Still, my work forces me to be able to handle linux as well as bsd and windows, so Im stuck using and learning all of them. But at home, all my machines run FreeBSD. > these have been swimming around in my head for a while, and i have > gotten pretty comfortable with linux, and curiousity has driven me > to begin learning freebsd now regardless of the answers. i am not > a hacker or a seasoned *NIX admin though, and would like some > better founded opinions that my own :) No opinion is better then your own. Noone can tell you what works for you. People can tell you what they think, but that does not mean you have to agree with them. Try it out for yourself and see what you think. If you get stuck, we are here to help you. -- R
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3EC8AE46.90009>