Open vs. Net vs. Free BSD 3

[jardows]

I'm looking to replace some linux boxes w/BSD, but can't really find a good comparison among the different types. What are the pros and cons, strengths and weaknesses to each variation?

Thanks!

Jacob Meadows

 

[devinci]

hi

OpenBSD = security
NetBSD = multiple arch.
FreeBSD = desktop/server

hope that helps alittle

 

[tsmullins]

agree with devinci, also freebsd is supposed to have an edge in speed. but, they are all so fast you would have to have a big load to notice.

shane

 

[buraglio]

devinci is pretty much dead on. Open is the easiest for me since I started with it, but Free has a bit better documentation in my opinion and more software support (as well as a larger ports collection) Net is cool, but the only reason I ever used it was to run it on obscure hardware (so I don't have much exp with it). I'd recommend Free or open depending on what you want to do with it. ----------------------------------------
Nicholas D. Buraglio

http://www.buraglio.com/nick/gpg-pub-key.txt

 

[murrik]

Hi, jardows,

welcome to the club ... all the previous notes are correct. I use FreeBSD (1 server and desktops) and OpenBSD (3 servers), so:

IMHO:

OpenBSD is more security-oriented comparing to others (using default config on all boxes), so it's better suited for mail&web servers with no GUI installed.

FreeBSD has much more software in it's ports tree, so it seems to be a bit more user-oriented, and serves nice as desktop OS, though performing quite well as server platform with some configuration alterings.

Have no experience with NetBSD, so no comments on this...

Cheers,
Murrik