Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 17:30:52 +0100 From: "Karel J. Bosschaart" <karelj@wop21.wop.wtb.tue.nl> To: jimmy fix <jim_fix@operamail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: bsd flavors Message-ID: <20010108173051.A79672@wop21.wop.wtb.tue.nl> In-Reply-To: <3A61870D@operamail.com>; from jim_fix@operamail.com on Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:32:18AM -0500 References: <3A61870D@operamail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:32:18AM -0500, jimmy fix wrote: > hi there... > > i'm new to bsd and would like to make the following question: > > considering i'd use bsd for: > 1. desctop (workstation) system with dial-up to ISP > 2. experiment with networking at home with a few old systems i plan to load > bsd on and try configure as firewall, server etc > > which would u think to be the best flavor? freebsd, openbsd or netbsd. > FreeBSD I would say. > i know that i shouldnt probably ask u this question but i'm a bit confused. i > dont quite get what the differences are between the flavors of bsd. > In a nutshell and thus far from complete: FreeBSD: ease of use and focus on i386 and alpha platforms. OpenBSD: Security, some more platforms supported. NetBSD : Portability; they want to support as many platforms as possible. > for example it is said that netbsd has extensive networking etc. does that > mean that the others are somehow limited. i mean could i set up freebsd as > proxy or firewall ? (just basic stuff to learn). or openbsd security...do i > realy need that kind of stuff for dial-up workstation and basic server > configurations usage? Proxy/firewall shouldn't be a problem on FreeBSD. In fact, all BSD's have good networking. That OpenBSD focuses on security doesn't mean that the others are insecure. > it seems that there is a lot of info about each flavor but not too much on > which one to use as beginner etc... > I think that FreeBSD is the easiest for the beginner having not much experience with unix. But the learning curve might be steeper than with Linux, because FreeBSD assumes that you are able to track down problems, read man pages and documentation. The good thing about this is that you learn a lot and once you're on the good track you will enjoy ;-). > my experience with unix is basic. i installed red-hat later version but wasnt > realy much faster than windows as they said. moreover it had that staroffice > thing which is written in java and gave my 233mmx a realy hard time...i mean > that was even slowere than ms iexplorer. Staroffice is not written in Java, but yes, it is horribly slow. And on a fast machine I experienced so many Staroffice crashes that I never use it anymore. If "faster than windows" (whatever that means) is a concern for you then it really depends on the application you're running. I'm achieving "speed" by using old-fashioned traditional utilities like awk, vi, shell scripts etc. Very often on the command line and takes a lot of time to learn, but I can't live without anymore... they do the job I want them to do fast and reliably. Installing with the idea that you will get the same things as in Windows but "faster" might lead to a disappointment IMHO. Karel. 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?20010108173051.A79672>