| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 51531 | 2004-11-23 08:42:00 | Linux - or OpenBSD or FreeBSD? | JohnD (509) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 295417 | 2004-11-23 08:42:00 | I have a friend who is becoming very tired of defending his Windows based PC from viruses, trojan horses, adware, ..... and initially asked me if I would assist him to install Linux. After doing some research, he is wondering if OpenBSD would be a better choice. My initial response is (with a Linux bias and not with a lot of knowledge of OpenBSD) was: As a home desktop, Linux would be more suitable due to: 1.available software (does all Linux software work on OpenBSD?) 2.ease of OS installation - no graphical installation for BSD (but does that make it harder?) 3.ease of application installation (no RPMs) 4. ease of configuration (e.g. setting up internet connection). All modern Linux distributions have very good GUI wizards - is this true for OpenBSD (I guess so since you still use KDE/GNOME) Plus my support knowledge of Linux. But then, I am biased. Any comments? |
JohnD (509) | ||
| 295418 | 2004-11-23 09:01:00 | I don't believe that everything is interchangeable between the OS's even though they are similar. From what I have heard and read, BSD is very stable and quiet fast. I would start your friend off on as user friendly distro as you can lay your hands on, there's no point swapping malware and constant patches for sitting in front of their PC and wondering what the heck to do next or worse, having a fiddle were they shouldn't and doing some damage (like someone I know intimately). Once he/she is settled into that then they could look around for new challenges or if they have a spare box put the experiments on that. Murray P. |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 295419 | 2004-11-23 09:36:00 | I agree with Murray P. Ah yes, that unfamiliar feeling. Bash? SU? Root? It depends how much of an alternative O/S n00b he is. For the total beginners, I would suggest Lycoris/Linspire/Knoppix. They're a bit more familiar feeling to windows users, and some can be found as live CD's, to try out before they install. Be warned, they're kind of neutered though, although you'd know that already probably. If your friend has an idea of what linux is about, perhaps mandrake, fedora, debian or slackware. They all have their good points. It depends what they want to use it for. Of course there's always good ol' Kiwi-made Yoper... Catweazle |
Catweazle (2535) | ||
| 295420 | 2004-11-23 11:09:00 | OpenBSD is not the wisest option for a desktop PC in most situations. Your friend may have to be prepared to edit some application source code to get most desktop applications working (Mozilla, KDE etc). When given the choice between developing a secure system and making it user-approachable the OpenBSD developers have clearly opt for the former; this being apparent in everything from the install to the manual editing of .conf files. FreeBSD on the other hand, makes a very good desktop. Right now I am writing this reply from a FreeBSD system. It's running Fluxbox as a WM and I'm using Firefox for browsing and mutt to read my email - it is very functional. Despite what you may hear FreeBSD isn't *as* hard to configure as a desktop machine as some people make it out to be. However if your friend has had no exposure to UNIX before he may be in for a steep albeit rewarding learning curve. As for linux binary compatibility FreeBSD is right up there. Most GNU/Linux programs can be run under FreeBSD with the appropriate kernel module + linux_base. Programs that rely heavily on the Linux /proc system will probably not work though. And configuration? It *is* easy once you are used to it. Hacking .conf files may seem primitive at first but it is actually a very efficient way of doing things. Do encourage your friend to at least try FreeBSD - it is very rewarding the knowledge gained by being "thrown in the deep end" and of course, the bigger the FreeBSD user base, the better. Hmm, I seem to have mumbled on for quite some time. Please ask any questions about *BSD your friend may have as I am always an advocate for them : ) |
Caesius (3758) | ||
| 295421 | 2004-11-23 11:44:00 | Hmm, FreeBSD Review (distrowatch.com) at Distrowatch. It catching on to a wider audience by the looks of it's # 11 ranking. I think I mad the mistake of reading about the Open ver and assuming they were pretty much the same. The package list looks like it has contains all you'll need for a desktop, and 2 CD's isn't too much of a download either. Don't you love these decisions ;) Murray P |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 295422 | 2004-11-23 12:08:00 | I've never tried OpenBSD. However I've tried FreeBSD and RH 6 to Fedora Core 3 as well as Slackware. FreeBSD at that time I tried it, was mission impossible to install, it however has improved vastly over the years and is quite suitable for Desktop usage, I still would say it's more powerful being used as a dedicated server of some sort. I would still have to say Linux is more friendlier and has a wider range of apps available for it, Linux and FreeBSD share similar low-level system calls, so porting between them is quite easy. In the end, Linux all the way, I've managed to replace every aspect of Windows use on Fedora Core 3 after relearning new programs and how they work, so I'll be in Fedora more than Windows although I usually have to sneak back in if I have to try a Windows product out. Kame |
Kame (312) | ||
| 295423 | 2004-11-23 22:27:00 | Stage3 Gentoo 2004.3 (http://www.gentoo.org) | Chilling_Silence (9) | ||
| 295424 | 2004-11-24 00:51:00 | Linux is a Unix . The xxxBSDs are Unix . BSDs are more suited to someone who has used Unix . . . OpenBSD is widely used for servers, because it has always had a strong emphasis on security . netBSD runs on many platforms, 60 or so . Someone whose computer experience is "Windows" is going to have more joy with Linux, because it has been distributed commercially . But I don't advise any Linux distribution which is "friendly" because it "looks like Windows" . That will always cause problems because Linux/Unix isn't Windows . *nix is an operating system . Windows is a programme loader with a fancy front end . If something works in a certain way in Windows that [n]not[/b] a reason for it to work in that way in *nix . It might, but assumptions that it "should" will lead to disapppointment, or worse . ;-) Linux plus a book (or books) . There are plenty of real books and Internet books at all levels . FAQ80 lists a few . I quite like Mandrake and Red Hat for simple installation . . . |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 295425 | 2004-11-24 01:06:00 | >(like someone I know intimately) Not yourself was it Murray P :D :D |
mikebartnz (21) | ||
| 295426 | 2004-11-24 01:37:00 | > >(like someone I know intimately) > Not yourself was it Murray P :D :D so wot's it to ya, eh X-( wana make somming ov it duu ya ;\ Well ok, I've had a few wee accidents and the misfortune to break a few installations, nothing half a brain and some knowledge wouldn't fix though :D It's why I'm coming around to the idea that you should have one rock solid stable distro for your everyday needs (read windows desktop / productivity app replacement) and another on a different drive at least but preferably in it's own box where you can load all sorts of interesting things without putting your work in danger. BSD or a Debian distro look likely candidates for the former, anything goes for the latter. |
Murray P (44) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||