BSD/Linux comparison... ?

[questio verum]

What I'd like to know, if anyone here cares to frame it for me; is how Linux and BSD compare. How do they compare in terms of feature sets? Stability? Security? Flexibility? Base of available applications? How do the philosophies behind each differ? Or do they? What are the most discernable differences between the two?

My experience with BSD is limited to loading it on a spare drive and poking around the desktop for a few minutes. My experience with Linux (aside from a few sporadic flirtations over the years) is limited to about 5 weeks with Kubuntu. I'm very glad to finally be free of ms virii, er... I mean os'es. Now I'm ready to take the next step and educate myself a little. THX!


qv

[anomie]

A viewpoint that I generally agree with can be found here:
BSD For Linux Users :: Intro

To each his own. Learn about both, try both (and give each a fair chance), take your pick.

[questio verum]

anomie,

Thank you. Exactly what I was hoping for... clear, cogent, and factual, without being dry. Very cool.


qv

[Agent-X]

I really don't see the difference. I think at the moment, Linux is better than FreeBSD. I mean, I try to compile as many things as I can from source already. And this "portage" systems seems like all FreeBSD has to preach about. I can do the same thing with apt-get and Debian. I'm pretty sure Debian offers me better options. Also, the idea that FreeBSD is a system of its own makes me feel that it's like Windows.

For what I've read, if a person is going to have a server, FreeBSD is a good choice. However, it's not a good choice for a desktop user.

[daark.child]

I really don't see the difference. I think at the moment, Linux is better than FreeBSD. I mean, I try to compile as many things as I can from source already. And this "portage" systems seems like all FreeBSD has to preach about. I can do the same thing with apt-get and Debian. I'm pretty sure Debian offers me better options. Also, the idea that FreeBSD is a system of its own makes me feel that it's like Windows.

For what I've read, if a person is going to have a server, FreeBSD is a good choice. However, it's not a good choice for a desktop user.

FreeBSD does not use portage. Gentoo uses portage and the idea of portage is/was based on FreeBSD ports. You can also use binary packages in FreeBSD via the pkg* tools (these are the tools you should probably have compared with apt-get), so FreeBSD is not just about compiling things from source.

Like Linux, FreeBSD is a general OS that can be used for any purpose defined by you the user. Yes it maybe more popular as a server OS than a desktop OS, but I think the same currently applies to Linux as well. In terms of hardware support and momentum, Linux seems to be in the lead in certain areas and in others, FreeBSD seems to be better. One thing to note is that the FreeBSD devs are a bit conservative in certain areas, so do not just add nifty features just for the sake of it. This helps increase the stability of their OS and thats why it used in many production environments.

FreeBSD is classed as a system on its own because the kernel and the rest of the OS are developed by the same people. This does not mean that FreeBSD is in anyway similar to Windows. In Linux, the kernel devs develop the kernel, the userland tools are from the FSFs GNU project and then the distro maintainers add their own stuff.

Ultimately Linux and FreeBSD have a lot in common, so use whichever suites you best. For those that want to use BSD on the desktop but struggle with the main FreeBSD release, then take a look as PC-BSD or Desktop BSD.

[anomie]

I really don't see the difference.

Learn about FreeBSD, try it out, and then talk.

If you don't know both operating systems well, I don't see how you can give an informed analysis.

[technossomy]

I make these and similar analyses too sometimes and for the record, this would be a valuable resource: Comparison of open source operating systems - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia