FreeBSD vs Linux

Vulpes Velox v.velox at
Tue Jan 17 21:38:43 PST 2006

On Tue, 17 Jan 2006 17:00:26 -0500
"Tamouh H." <hakmi at> wrote:

> > Just get a different sound card.  There are lotsof
> > inexpensive sounds cards that are probably supported by
> > FreeBSD for just a few (10-30) $
> >
> > Btw, this problem happens with Windows, Mac OS X, etc as
> > well.  I have been trying to put an extra USB/Firewire card
> > in my G5, and they work, but with weird side effects like
> > hanging IO.  My dad had some sound card issues on Windows
> > with "supported" cards.
> >
> > Chad
> >
> Oh come on, I've been working with all Linux, FreeBSD and Windows.
> Getting a different card is not the solution. It is actually an
> absurd suggestion which goes to prove further that Unix has not
> matured yet to compete with Microsoft.

It is easily good enought to compete with Microsoft. Most hardware
out there is generally crappy and low end and that does not change
regardless of OS. I say it is a good suggestion if they bought the
hardware, without checking what is supported.

> If you are looking for compatibility, Windows is the answer.
> You are looking for security and stable releases, FreeBSD is the
> answer
> If you are seeking *free* OS with largest compatibility, Linux is
> the answer

With the list that FreeBSD supports I've rarely found it a problem
to find hardware that works nicely.

> If you are seeking performance, FreeBSD is the answer.
> Windows almost runs everything, FreeBSD is stable, good performance
> but it is behind Linux when it comes to releasing drivers (example,
> zero-channel RAID cards weren't supported until very recently and
> still not quite official). The Linux OS has a much larger community
> than FreeBSD and hence has more development in it.

Larger, but I am not really seeing any thing that interesting going
on it.

> In my opinion, I think the Unix world had missed the boat on trying
> to take over MSFT. The new Windows coming out are as stable as the
> Unix servers. With the Vista Windows, and a dramatic reduction of
> GUI, you can expect much better OS.

When was FreeBSD trying to take over MSFT? That really seems more
likely something assorted linux projects were trying to do by making
those OS idiot proof.

> Unix community simply did not get their act together and try to
> build an OS for the masses. The main argument for Unix is it is
> "Free", but compatibility and upgrade paths are different issues.

I've never had any compatibility problems or problems with upgrade
paths with FreeBSD.

Any one that bases hardware decisions on what what has most support
is going to screw themselves, if they think they can go that route so
they can buy any thing. Yes, you can run nearly any thing with XP,
but if you don't pay close attention to what you buy, it is still
going to majorly suck.

Open source unix is not a OS for the masses, but one for those who
need it and want it. I use it because all around it is more
economical for me.

More information about the freebsd-questions mailing list