From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Mar  7 03:47:10 1996
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id DAA01683
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 03:47:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hq.icb.chel.su (icb-rich-gw.icb.chel.su [193.125.10.34])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with SMTP id DAA01667
          for <hackers@freebsd.org>; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 03:46:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (babkin@localhost) by hq.icb.chel.su (8.6.5/8.6.5) id QAA11889; Thu, 7 Mar 1996 16:46:56 +0500
From: "Serge A. Babkin" <babkin@hq.icb.chel.su>
Message-Id: <199603071146.QAA11889@hq.icb.chel.su>
Subject: Re: Comparing FreeBSD and other OSs
To: lehey.pad@sni.de (Greg Lehey)
Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 16:46:56 +0500 (GMT+0500)
Cc: hackers@freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199603070933.KAA18914@nixpbe.pdb.sni.de> from "Greg Lehey" at Mar 7, 96 10:29:50 am
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23]
Content-Type: text
Sender: owner-hackers@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

> 
> The current FreeBSD/Linux comparison is only part of a larger
> question: which operating system should I install on my PC?
> Stretching the term "Operating System" to include program loaders like
> DOS, we have at least the following choices on standard PC hardware:
> 
[...]
>   Xenix
[...]
> 
> Comments? Flames?

IMHO Xenix means two choises, not one:

   Xenix 286
   Xenix 386

Xenix 386 is completely dead (killed by SCO Unix). I can suggest only
one use for it: it would work even in 1.5M of memory. And I see no
reason to run Xenix 286 on any machine with {>2}86 CPU.

-SB