Date: Wed, 11 Feb 1998 11:45:04 -0500 (EST) From: Uncle Flatline <flatline@gri.gallaudet.edu> To: Vincent Defert <vdefert@trace.fr> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Linux Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980211111632.13097A-100000@gri.gallaudet.edu> In-Reply-To: <34E1DAF1.4A47@trace.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bottom line: Your milage WILL vary. Backup your important stuff and take the plunge. Try it yourself. That's the only way to figure out if it will work for you. Look into NetBSD and OpenBSD if you have the time. (Check out www.netbsd.org, and www.openbsd.org). I gather FreeBSD works better than Linux for many, but it didn't for me. That DOESN'T make it a bad OS. It just makes it a bad OS for me. I tried asking the same question about a week and a half ago. Then, after three years with Slackware Linux, I switched. Today I'm leaving it to try NetBSD and maybe in a week or two, OpenBSD. I may try one more clean install of FreeBSD before I go... this time using their CURRENT (maybe unstable) version. However, I think within a month, I'm going to be back to Linux. (Linux was working fine for me, but I wanted to see what all the fuss was about regarding the alternatives. The only reason I see for sticking it out with a BSD-based system, at this point, is to diversify my resume a bit further.) A general impression that I'm not qualified to evaluate one way or the other, is that FreeBSD's code is tighter and the security capabilities of all the BSD's are better. This may make FreeBSD a pretty good server box, but for me, it lacks several things that I need. After asking about several problems on FreeBSD-questions, I got feedback that indicated it couldn't do what Linux could: - Properly connect to a DECserver multiplexor. - Boot Windows 95 from my second hard disk. (This appears to vary. Others do not have this problem, but others don't seem to have my setup.) - Proper full VT-terminal emulation outside of X-Windows, while still maintaining the ability to use the syscons graphics. - Connect to a Linux server. I've fought with these problems for over a week now, and maybe if I fought for a month I'd solve them. But I didn't have to fight to get them working right away with Linux. I did get responses like "Maybe in Windows 98... ummm NT 5.0, err... I mean, FreeBSD 3.0," "Change your hardware," and "We don't consider that worth doing at this time," which are some of Micro$oft's favorite lines. In my day-to-day usage, I couldn't find anything that FreeBSD did, that Linux could not. (And I saw several people on this mailing list asking about Linux emulation. There appeared to be a lot of interest in programs that only run under Linux. On the Linux lists, I don't see nearly as many requests for FreeBSD emulation or programs that only run under FreeBSD.) On Wed, 11 Feb 1998, Vincent Defert wrote: > Dear Sir or Madam, > > I am using an old version of Linux and I consider upgrading. > FreeBSD seems to have a very positive image, but the same is > true of Linux. > > Could you please explain the main differences between them, > and why people who tested both systems chose FreeBSD rather > than Linux? > > I think it would be interesting to include this discussion > in the FAQ, provided these differences are not just a matter > of individual taste or activism. > > Thanks in advance. > > Vincent Defert > (vdefert@trace.fr) -- Kevin Cole <Flatline> | E-mail: flatline@pchb1f.gallaudet.edu Gallaudet Research Institute | WWW: http://pchb1f.gallaudet.edu/ Hall Memorial Bldg S-419 | Voice: (202) 651-5135 Washington, D.C. 20002-3695 | FAX: (202) 651-5746 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe 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.LNX.3.96.980211111632.13097A-100000>