On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 8:22 PM, Andrew Lentvorski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Brad Beyenhof wrote:
>
> > On 12/04/2008, Todd Walton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > What are the differences between the BSDs? As a first time BSD user,
> > > which should I pick to play with?
> > >
> >
> > Concisely:
> > * OpenBSD is the most security-conscious, and is the most difficult to
> > set up without experience.
> > * FreeBSD has the most packages available, and has the most
> > customizable install process.
> > * NetBSD runs on the greatest variety of hardware.
> >
> > A bit more in-depth:
> > http://www.unixreview.com/documents/s=7459/uni1040336129456/
> >
> > Of the three, I've only spent time with FreeBSD; while it worked well
> > for my playing around, I don't know comparatively whether NetBSD would
> > be a better first-time option.
> >
>
> Probably not. I would go with FreeBSD for a first timer. I would *not* go
> with OpenBSD unless you really are shooting for high-security. It is
> secure, but it is not user friendly.
>
> In addition to the ports system, FreeBSD also has a really good Linux
> emulation layer. So, if there is something Linux-only, FreeBSD can normally
> cope.
>
> In fact, there have been reports that FreeBSD runs some Linux-only stuff
> (like Oracle) faster than native Linux on the same hardware.
FWIW, FreeBSD seems to support 3 hardware families these days, i386,
x86_64 and sparc64.
No more Alpha, not ever PPC.
carl
--
carl lowenstein marine physical lab u.c. san diego
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
