Quote:
Originally Posted by 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. |
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.