On Fri 19 Jun 2009 at 11:23:26 PDT Michael R. Wayne wrote:
OK, I'm going to take a guess here that English may not be Michal's primary language and re-ask his question: Given the several versions of *BSD, I have been led to understand that each excells in different ways. How do I select which one is right for my application, what are the underlying reasons that would lead me to that choice and what are the the disadvantages I am risking? This is, actually, not an inappropriate question coming from a potential new user who is not familiar with the history surrounding the various versions and would make an outstanding FAQ. As an example, we run FreeBSD on our firewalling machines because it works well enough and we prefer the reduced support costs of using a single O/S across our network. I am unsure of what the advantage of moving to OpenBSD might be and would find it very difficult to quantify the advantages (if any) versus the increased support resources required. This is a very real issue. Linux has a similar problem; I've personally been in meetings where clients examined the myriad Linux distributions and say "It's very likely that we will make the incorrect choice. So we'll go with Windows." I suspect similar events have occurred with *BSD. So, rather than jumping on people about them bringing up religous wars (because, face it, you CAN edit a file perfectly well in either vi or emacs :-), we'd all be better served by giving them enough information to make the right choice in their situation while realizing the tradeoffs they are making.
I agree, this shouldn't necessarily be treated as flamebait or trolling. But shouldn't the question be redirected to the advocacy mailing list/team? _______________________________________________ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
