Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 01:52:48 -0500 (EST) From: "James A. Mutter" <jmutter@netwalk.com> To: "Jason C. Wells" <jcwells@u.washington.edu> Cc: Chris McCoy <chris@sloth.org>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9812120148500.22255-100000@insomnia.local.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9812112227050.8886-100000@s8-37-26.student.washington.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 11 Dec 1998, Jason C. Wells wrote: > On Sat, 12 Dec 1998, Chris McCoy wrote: > > >howdoes OpenBSD,and NetBSDcompare to free? > > NetBSD concentrates on multi platfrom. OpenBSD concentrates on security. > FreeBSD concentrates on Intel platforms. > I've run all three, Open, Net, and Free - If you plan on running on an Intel Platform I really think that Free is the way to go. I've found open to be a little slow, and Net is missing a few of the refinements that Free has. I made a decision, if it's Intel HW, then it's FreeBSD - nothing else. Please don't take that to mean that Net/Open are flawed in some way, because they arent. I believe that because Free happens to have concentrated on the PC that they have developed a superior product, on the PC. That's it, nothing more. Now, I'm waiting for a Mac and a SPARC to run Net and Open on. :) 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?Pine.BSF.4.05.9812120148500.22255-100000>