| ask: -----------
 What's the main differences between the two, and why should one choose
 one or the other for example ?
 -----------------------------------
 
 ans:
 -----------
 I'm going to take a stab at this.
 
 I've been a FreeBSD user since my first exploration into non-MS OSes
 many years ago, so my Linux knowledge is second-hand (and may not be
 100% accurate or up-to-date) but here are tidbits I think I know:
 
 - The licenses are fundamentally different. This doesn't matter so much
 to me but may to you. I'll therefore skip that, but understand that BSD
 vs. GPL is somewhat of a Holy War.
 
 - Linux seems to me to be more disorganized. With FreeBSD, you have one
 true OS. With Linux, there's the true Linux kernel, but that's useless
 by itself. Instead, it depends on other groups to put together
 distributions around a kernel (Red Hat, SuSE, etc) adding on userland
 programs and maybe even patching the kernel a bit for their own needs.
 With FreeBSD, if you're running FreeBSD 4.8 then you're running the same
 OS as everyone else with "4.8". With Linux, you're not running Linux
 version whatever, you're running Red Hat ver whatever, which is based
 upon a particular version of the kernel, which is different than some
 other distribution even if it's based upon the same kernel version. An
 analogy is with cars: With Linux, there's a Linux "engine" but many
 different companies build cars around that engine. With FreeBSD, they
 make the engine AND the car.
 
 - <opinion> Linux users seem to be more "fanatical", while the FreeBSD
 camp seems more level-headed </opinion>
 
 - FreeBSD is renown for it's stability. Linux is a bit funkier... it
 seems to go for flash and glitz more than rock-solid stability. This is
 not to say that Linux can't be made stable, or that FreeBSD can never
 crash. But they approach things from a different angle. A Linux
 distribution for example tends to initially install X and a ton of
 programs you may or may not use. The benefit is that you might get to a
 GUI immediately with less work, but you also might have 100 daemons
 running you really don't need. FreeBSD on the other hand might take more
 work to get to initial GUI but once you're there you probably only
 installed what you really wanted to, and nothing/little else.
 
 An enlightening point is found at Netcraft's list of the servers with
 the longest uptime... check what OSes they run:
 
 http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html
 
 - Yahoo runs on FreeBSD. Hotmail did too, before Microsoft took it over.
 The largest/busiest FTP site on the 'net runs on FreeBSD (www.cdrom.com).
 
 - The FreeBSD ports system is awesome. As far as I know, most Linux
 distributions don't have anything like it. I think one has something
 that is close but is based upon precompiled binaries. FreeBSD's ports
 you compile yourself, which takes longer but has benefits that I like. I
 think the various Linuxes are trying to "catch up" to FreeBSD in this
 regard but I could be wrong about the current state of affairs. Keeping
 apps (and the OS itself) up-to-date with tools like CVSup and
 portupgrade is sickeningly easy.
 
 - I find upgrading FreeBSD to be incredibly simple. I have heard it
 surpasses most Linuxes but I could be wrong. But basically with 4
 commands you're done (aside from mergemaster, which could use
 improvement, but really isn't so bad for most simple people like me once
 you "get it").
 
 - Linux gets more press, but I consider FreeBSD "the best OS you've
 never heard of". I'm a firm believer in having your vote be counted even
 if it's the underdog. I'm putting my support behind FreeBSD because I
 like it better than Linux, even though I'm in the minority. Using Linux
 "because everyone else does" is the same mistake that turned Windows
 into a painful monopoly.
 
 - There are technical details with threads and scheduling that differ
 between the two but I don't understand them enough to say anything more
 on the subject.
 
 - Don't let people scare you into thinking FreeBSD can't be used on the
 desktop and is only good for servers. I use it as my desktop at home.
 
 Well that's all I can think of for now. Hopefully I don't start a flame
 war... I am not anti-Linux (although I'm anti MS).
 |