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