Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Path: sserve!manuel!munnari.oz.au!uunet!kithrup!sef From: sef@kithrup.COM (Sean Eric Fagan) Subject: Re: Catch What They're Saying About Us... Organization: Kithrup Enterprises, Ltd. Date: Fri, 25 Sep 1992 02:18:13 GMT Message-ID: <1992Sep25.021813.2369@kithrup.COM> References: <19oe23INNqh0@agate.berkeley.edu> <VIXIE.92Sep23102423@cognition.pa.dec.com> <19ta0nINNj2q@agate.berkeley.edu> Lines: 20 In article <19ta0nINNj2q@agate.berkeley.edu> wjolitz@soda.berkeley.edu (William F. Jolitz) writes: (Actually, it's Lynne.) >BSDi, on the other hand, is probably the most adversely impacted by >both 386BSD software activities and Careware charity activities. BSDi is actually benefited, to some degree, by 386BSD. BSD/386 is stabler, better supported, and commercial (and proprietary; one need not follow from the other); 386BSD is newer, still flaky in some cases, and, as far as I know, not a commercial product from anyone. If I needed an OS to do work, it would probably be BSD/386. If I were going to install an OS on a machine for the express purpose of playing, it would be either Linux or 386BSD (probably the latter, at least until networking is available and stable in Linux). -- Sean Eric Fagan | "You can't get lost in one room, no matter how sef@kithrup.COM | little effort you make to learn your way around." -----------------+ -- William E Davidsen (william@crd.GE.COM) Any opinions expressed are my own, and generally unpopular with others.