As I remember it, a large part of the purpose of OpenBSD was that it was developed outside the US so it wasn't subject to US restrictions on the export of strong cryptography. This allowed them to ship 128-bit Blowfish encryption, which added to the whole "super-secure" thing. But now that Uncle Sam have relaxed their export controls, part of the inherent advantage of OpenBSD over the other BSDs has been eroded.
The other strong point in OpenBSD's favour is the code auditing process, but FreeBSD is now going along the same path of tightening up its codebase. Again, the distinctions between the two main BSDs are becoming blurred. If this continues, will there still be a need for OpenBSD? Given the history between Theo and the FreeBSD camp, I can't ever see the projects merging. And with the price differential between Open and Free (admittedly not much, but still significant) I think Theo may have to relinquish his stranglehold on the official ISO image to the distro if OpenBSD is to survive. Despite the advantages of OpenBSD, I am still put off by the prospect of paying $25 (?) every 6 months, when I can get FreeBSD for more-or-less the cost of distribution.
Slashdot Mirror
The other strong point in OpenBSD's favour is the code auditing process, but FreeBSD is now going along the same path of tightening up its codebase. Again, the distinctions between the two main BSDs are becoming blurred. If this continues, will there still be a need for OpenBSD? Given the history between Theo and the FreeBSD camp, I can't ever see the projects merging. And with the price differential between Open and Free (admittedly not much, but still significant) I think Theo may have to relinquish his stranglehold on the official ISO image to the distro if OpenBSD is to survive. Despite the advantages of OpenBSD, I am still put off by the prospect of paying $25 (?) every 6 months, when I can get FreeBSD for more-or-less the cost of distribution.
- Lita