I know that benchmarks can be so much baloney. I was looking more for something like these topics: 1. Hardware resources 1.1 What is supported, what is not 1.2 Minimal system requirements .. 2. Installation 2.1 Ease of installation - "gotchas" 2.2 Upgrade or replacement mode for an earlier installation .. 3. X and related support 3.1 Servers 3.2 Window managers ... 4. Software tools .. 5. Network management .. And so on, and so on. A sort of detailed description along the lines of the PC Magazine comparative reviews of the 80's, but hopefully a little more "savvy". Something like this doesn't have all the answers, but at least it can provide a basis for more detailed discussion about specific issues. I purposely formulated my question fairly broadly. Some of the answers above do not do credit to the intelligence of the writers. Otherwise, I have no "religious" predilections about Linuces vs Unices. Incidentally, I have taken on notice the problem of the length of the "signature garbage" attached to my (?) email. Dan Feiglin Vadim Vygonets wrote: > Quoth Daniel Feiglin on Tue, Jun 08, 1999: > > Has anyone done a detailed comparison of Linux and FreeBSD? > > Benchmarks are all lies. Linux people will tell you that Linux > is great, FreeBSD people will tell you that FreeBSD is great. > You need to look at both sources, and refuse to believe either of > them. > > And, what exactly do you want to know about these systems? > > Vadik the BSD bigot. > > -- > Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, they are quick to > anger and have no need for subtlety.
begin: vcard fn: Daniel Feiglin n: Feiglin;Daniel org: Dilog Computers Ltd. adr: POB 36;;;Shavei Shomron, Mobile Post;;44858;ISRAEL email;internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel;work: 972 9 861 6204 tel;fax: 972 9 862 1052 tel;home: 972 9 832 0939 x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 x-mozilla-html: FALSE version: 2.1 end: vcard
