Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 16:07:53 -0800 From: Garrett Cooper <youshi10@u.washington.edu> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Linux Message-ID: <43CD86D9.401@u.washington.edu> In-Reply-To: <20060117220235.5886D43D46@mx1.FreeBSD.org> References: <20060117220235.5886D43D46@mx1.FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Tamouh H. wrote:
>> Just get a different sound card. There are lotsof
>> inexpensive sounds cards that are probably supported by
>> FreeBSD for just a few (10-30) $
>>
>> Btw, this problem happens with Windows, Mac OS X, etc as
>> well. I have been trying to put an extra USB/Firewire card
>> in my G5, and they work, but with weird side effects like
>> hanging IO. My dad had some sound card issues on Windows
>> with "supported" cards.
>>
>> Chad
>>
>>
>
> Oh come on, I've been working with all Linux, FreeBSD and Windows.
>
> Getting a different card is not the solution. It is actually an absurd
> suggestion which goes to prove further that Unix has not matured yet to
> compete with Microsoft.
>
> If you are looking for compatibility, Windows is the answer.
>
> You are looking for security and stable releases, FreeBSD is the answer
>
> If you are seeking *free* OS with largest compatibility, Linux is the answer
>
> If you are seeking performance, FreeBSD is the answer.
>
> Windows almost runs everything, FreeBSD is stable, good performance but it
> is behind Linux when it comes to releasing drivers (example, zero-channel
> RAID cards weren't supported until very recently and still not quite
> official). The Linux OS has a much larger community than FreeBSD and hence
> has more development in it.
>
> In my opinion, I think the Unix world had missed the boat on trying to take
> over MSFT. The new Windows coming out are as stable as the Unix servers.
> With the Vista Windows, and a dramatic reduction of GUI, you can expect much
> better OS.
>
Where did you read that about Vista? I've seen the beta versions of
Vista and they all require cadillac machines with spiffy OpenGL cards,
etc, in order to function without a lot of lag and hiccups. And when you
turn all the bells and whistles off, Vista is nothing more than a
graphics enhanced versions of XP with additional security features, such
as required administrator logins, etc like Unix has been doing for years
and Mac has been doing for a while. Windows Vista will no doubt require
lots of RAM in comparison to XP because the developers/business team
will add more features than users can shake a stick at. Yet, sadly
enough I do not deny the fact that Windows is required given the
software development model and noting where the money lies in software
and hardware support. Heck, if Windows didn't exist I doubt I would have
a job =D.
-Garrett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43CD86D9.401>