Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.os.linux:34496 comp.os.386bsd.questions:1646
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux,comp.os.386bsd.questions
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!gatech!concert!samba!usenet
From: Brandon.Vanevery@launchpad.unc.edu (Brandon Vanevery)
Subject: Summary of Linux vs. 386BSD vs. Commercial Unixes
Message-ID: <1993Apr15.225354.18654@samba.oit.unc.edu>
Sender: usenet@samba.oit.unc.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: lambada.oit.unc.edu
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 22:53:54 GMT
Lines: 33
Both free unixes are deemed reliable by many sources.
386BSD has better TCP/IP, for now.
Linux is far less resource-hungry, due to shared libraries.
386BSD fixes come out slowly, all at once. Linux fixes come out quickly,
a little bit at a time.
Neither free unix has 24-bit color support. Both will get it at the same
time if it comes available, as both use XFree86.
Snittily Graphics Consulting Services makes 24-bit X drivers for S3 928
based boards, for several commercial unixes.
Commercial unixes are all very expensive. The cheapest is the new Univel
UNIXware - $250 for user version, $695 for the developer version. All
others are well over $1000. It's really rather silly, I think.
SCO Unix has been recommended to me as "the best" of the commercial
systems, by a few folks.
That's about all the info I have. Look to the FAQs for more precise
breakdowns of the commercial stuff.
Cheers,
Brandon
--
The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
internet: laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80