Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 12 Mar 2001 17:22:27 +0100
From:      Danny Pansters <danny@ricin.com>
To:        "Ben" <ben@cahostnet.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD and Linux (More Questions!)
Message-ID:  <01031217222700.22799@ricin.localnet>
In-Reply-To: <02c401c0ab03$fd58ca00$6102a00a@nhqadmin17>
References:  <02c401c0ab03$fd58ca00$6102a00a@nhqadmin17>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,=20


> These are my requirements for my desktop.  First of all let me say
> that this will be used for desktop purposes so It's important the
> operating system of choice is user friendly and supports the desktop
> hardware well, such as cd burners, sound cards and others.  Here they
> are:
> Large hardware support
> Large application support
> Easy configuration and installation of OS and apps
> FTP installs if possible
> Ports collections for easy upgrades and installations

After about two years of using Linux, I switched to freeBSD, also on my=20
desktop. Generally you can expect to be able to run the same=20
applications albeit that there are less of them. But for every purpose=20
I can think of there is at least one application in the ports that'll=20
do it. I use this box for everything.. cd burning, mp3 encoding, TV=20
viewer, graphics, webdesign, ... without many problems. I even use it=20
to upload mp3s to my Rio player.=20

The only thing I miss, but that's also the case with Linux, are good=20
applications for sound and video editing. That kind of software is just=20
too complicated to be well maintained in a small volunteer environment=20
I reckon.

> I looked at slackware as suggested by someone on the list.  Slackware
> doesn't even have an ftp installation.  Upgrades will be a bit tricky
> and a hassle.  The amount of support needed will not be there.  I may
> be wrong on this.  My findings of BSD is that it's more of a server
> based operating system.  Is this correct?

Yes and no. Much like Linux its also well suited as a desktop IMO.
Opinions about this vary though. Basically, it allows me to do anything=20
I did with Windows (seems ages ago :-) and much more.=20

>
> So the final question.  Should I stick with Red Hat Linux, go with
> slackware or go with BSD?  What will you guys recommend and why.  I

Red Hat is really messy! Go for Debian Linux if you want easy updating=20
through ftp. Again, opinions may vary but IMO Debian is by far the=20
nicest Linux distribution. It actually resembles freeBSD a bit in the=20
way it's organized I think. Here's a tip: If you decide to try Debian=20
by the way, stay away from the dselect install program. Just use=20
apt-get for everything.

I tried Slackware once but Debian's way better. Slack has more of a=20
snapshot-like release scheme I believe, so yeah, keeping it up to date=20
might be a challenge.

OK, finally some advocacy: FreeBSD is easier to configure than any=20
Linux distro I've seen. It's very straightforward and tends to have=20
sensible defaults. But I must say, had I never used Linux, I'd probably=20
never have found BSD let alone understand what "UNIX" is about. If you=20
want general "UNIX" knowledge then BSD is your thing I believe.

One more suggestion: for a desktop, don't be cheap when it comes to RAM.


Hope this helped :)


Danny Pansters
http://www.ricin.com

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?01031217222700.22799>