Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.os.linux.development.system Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!newsroom.utas.edu.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.new-york.net!ritz.mordor.com!bet From: bet@ritz.mordor.com (Bennett Todd) Subject: Re: The better (more suitable)Unix?? FreeBSD or Linux Organization: Mordor International Message-ID: <DMs95q.F0t@ritz.mordor.com> References: <4er9hp$5ng@orb.direct.ca> <4fg8fe$j9i@pell.pell.chi.il.us> <4fm2b1$ivs@park.uvsc.edu> <312219C3.79C2@circ.de.epfl.ch> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 1996 20:34:38 GMT Lines: 29 Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:14290 comp.os.linux.development.system:17919 >Well, this is how the poor man's logic works: [...] >There are (say) two good free unix systems for Intel. Both (and many >more) are distributed by WC on CDs. WC has a ftp file server on a PC >machine. This machine works under one of these two unix systems. [...] >Whichever is better (more suitable) for WC is better (more suitable) >for me. [...] >WC (presumably) wants to get the job done. So do I. [...] >Just not to be misunderstood: better & more suitable means merely >better & more suitable for ME. Assuming your requirements are the same as WC's, I agree with your reasoning. In fact, I also agree with the conclusion: for setting up a super high-volume internet server with a __Lot__ of FTP traffic, FreeBSD can't be beat. On the other hand, for many applications that center around being a single-user workstation, I find Linux nicer. The two are both advancing and improving at a wonderful pace. My current opinions are about FreeBSD 2.1.0-RELEASE compared to RedHat 2.1, which I compared one after another on the same PC (ISA 486DX266, 16MB RAM, ATI Mach64 w/ 2MB, WD ethernet card). I still like FreeBSD better for a heavy internet server; I still see benefits to Linux on single-user workstations. -Bennett