Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2008 19:38:19 -0700 From: James <oscartheduck@gmail.com> To: Predrag Punosevac <punosevac@math.arizona.edu> Cc: Chad Perrin <perrin@apotheon.com>, questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD & Linux distro Message-ID: <1203561499.6023.8.camel@pclmills> In-Reply-To: <47BCE0C1.80502@math.arizona.edu> References: <20080219114803.V2675@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <786348.74605.qm@web51104.mail.re2.yahoo.com> <20080219161404.GB91805@demeter.hydra> <20080219163634.GA46198@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> <20080219202749.GE92559@demeter.hydra> <20080221004656.GG97072@demeter.hydra> <47BCE0C1.80502@math.arizona.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 2008-02-20 at 19:24 -0700, Predrag Punosevac wrote: > Chad Perrin wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 01:27:49PM -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > > > >>> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 09:14:04AM -0700, Chad Perrin wrote: > >>> > >> [ snip a bunch of stuff ] > >> > >> On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 11:36:34AM -0500, Jerry McAllister wrote: > >> > >>> A good rundown of some of the differences. > >>> Maybe you can put this on a web page and get it added to lists > >>> of comparrisons. > >>> > >> Sure. I'll polish it up and post it somewhere in that polished form, > >> then reply here. If not today, I'll aim to get it done tomorrow. > >> > > > > Okay, posted: > > > > http://arc.apotheon.org/freebsd/vs_linux.html > > > > If anyone has suggestions for how to fix it up further, let me know. > > > > > Hi Chad, > > Here is my honest opinion. I hope it will help you improve the post :-) > > I didn't like very much the tone of the article as well as some > pejorative conclusion. If you are going to post something even > as a FreeBSD advocacy the tone of the article should be neutral and all > claims verifiable. Do not get me wrong. I > do not like Linux and more over I have never used it in my life but I > would have hard time to swallow some of your claims. > > How would you feel if I tell you that I use mostly OpenBSD because it is > easier for work than FreeBSD and in my experience much more stable than > FreeBSD. Those are my subjective feelings and probably have little to > do with the reality. If anything statement like that are irritating and > have no value to a person who is deciding between using OpenBSD or FreeBSD. > > Try to find on the internet couple of advocacy articles by Greg Lehey. > They are very well-written. > > Example: Statement of the type BSD appears more stable than Linux is > non-verifiable. > Statement of the type FreeBSD is direct decedent of the BSD flavor of > Unix started in mid seventies at the University of California Berkley > while the Linux kernel is Unix clone started in 1993 based on the > mixture of System V and BSD Unix is > verifiable. Or 80% of all servers with longest up time run FreeBSD is > something that can be verified. > > You should definitely address the following things > > 1. FreeBSD is longer in the development than Linux. > > 2. Probably 80% of the servers with the longest UP time run FreeBSD. > Give a link. Easy to find. Just a note -- linux is often not included in the lists of longest uptime because it has a feature whereby the uptime counter resets itself after a period of time. http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/accuracy.html#hz1000 > > 3. FreeBSD is a COMPLETE operating system GNU/Linux is not. > > 4. It has different development and engineering process than Linux. > > 5. It has better quality control at least because Linux has no quality > control at all. > > 6. The Largest FTP sever on the world run FreeBSD (your beloved freebsd.org) > > 7. FreeBSD has one of the best systems for the installation of the third > party software (ports and do not forget packages > as some people will jump at you and make a claim that Debian has better > packaging system as it is more efficient than compiling things from ports) > > 8. Most extensive collection of third party software (over 18000 ) only > second to Debian. > > 9. One of the best documented systems > > 10. Mention the advantage of the BSD license comparing to GPL for the > commercial use. > > 11. It is philosophically different than most Linux distros as all > services are turned of by default. > > 12. Unlike Linux it doesn't claim that is the best and most suitable for > everything. If you need security then Open is better choice. If you > need something for embedded devices probably Net is better choice. > > 13. More secure than Linux if for no other reason but for PF which is > ported from OpenBSD. Note that PF is not ported for Linux. > > 14. Kernel security level concept doesn't exist in Linux. > > Try to disperse common myth that BSD doesn't support hardware but do not > be shy to admit that lack support for things like > video conferencing. > > Do not be shy to admit that virtualization is poor and maybe > intensionally as quite of few people do not believe that putting > somebody's else cra*p on the top of FreeBSD will not make that cra*p > working better or be more secure. If you need Window's application run > Windows. > > > Does it make a good Desktop system? Depends what do you mean by that. If > you need everything working out of box > for your grandmother Mily probably not. If you need Flash and Java > plug-ins probably not. But if you need ROCK solid > workstation for academic work, occasional multimedia and want to be 100% > in control of your computer like me it is the best desktop OS around. > > > Most Kind Regards, > > Predrag > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1203561499.6023.8.camel>