Based on my experience, I do not agree. I have had more success with 5.1 (2 weeks ago) than 4.8 (about a year ago). I use Mandrake Linux full time at home and at work, and I experiment with FreeBSD at home when I have time. My experience is similar to the author of the article.
One point worth bearing in mind: the creators of FreeBSD have no particular interest in making it a competitor in the home/workstation market. There is an interview somewhere on freebsd.org (sorry, no link) that makes this clear. If you want a FreeBSD
non-server system with user-friendly stuff, get a Mac.
Having said all that, I like FreeBSD, and I think Linux can learn from it.
FreeBSD boot starts services much faster than Linux.
I get the impression that UFS is faster than ext2/ext3. Has anybody done some tests on this?
The documentation is more detailed and better written.
The package and ports systems work very smoothly, compared to rpms that are not portable across distributions.
FreeBSD puts anything "non-system" in/usr/local, including making use of/usr/local/etc. The division between essential system stuff and bits added later is blurred in a typical Linux system.
FreeBSD may be more effort to install and set up initially than some Linux distributions, but the effort is worth it, because real knowledge is gained. Even if you never use FreeBSD full time, just trying it out is good.
Obligatory MS bashing: The more you learn about Linux and xBSD, the more there is to use and enjoy. The more you learn about MS Windows, the greater your despair.
Slashdot Mirror
Based on my experience, I do not agree. I have had more success with 5.1 (2 weeks ago) than 4.8 (about a year ago). I use Mandrake Linux full time at home and at work, and I experiment with FreeBSD at home when I have time. My experience is similar to the author of the article.
One point worth bearing in mind: the creators of FreeBSD have no particular interest in making it a competitor in the home/workstation market. There is an interview somewhere on freebsd.org (sorry, no link) that makes this clear. If you want a FreeBSD non-server system with user-friendly stuff, get a Mac.
Having said all that, I like FreeBSD, and I think Linux can learn from it.
- FreeBSD boot starts services much faster than Linux.
- I get the impression that UFS is faster than ext2/ext3. Has anybody done some tests on this?
- The documentation is more detailed and better written.
- The package and ports systems work very smoothly, compared to rpms that are not portable across distributions.
- FreeBSD puts anything "non-system" in
/usr/local, including making use of /usr/local/etc. The division between essential system stuff and bits added later is blurred in a typical Linux system.
FreeBSD may be more effort to install and set up initially than some Linux distributions, but the effort is worth it, because real knowledge is gained. Even if you never use FreeBSD full time, just trying it out is good.Obligatory MS bashing: The more you learn about Linux and xBSD, the more there is to use and enjoy. The more you learn about MS Windows, the greater your despair.