Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36

Thread: NetBSD 6.0 Is On Approach With New Features

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,932

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brent View Post
    Linux doesn't really focus on anything, and that's one of its problems. It wants to work well on servers, desktop systems and embedded systems alike, with the very same codebase.
    Windows also runs on smartphones, desktop systems and servers.
    iOS and OS X are kinda same and they on smartphones, tablets, desktop computer, and they had an abandoned attempt at servers.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brent View Post
    Linux doesn't really focus on anything, and that's one of its problems. It wants to work well on servers, desktop systems and embedded systems alike, with the very same codebase.
    What's the old saying? Jack of all trades ... master of none?
    The *BSD are horrible for desktop in general (you might use it, but you'll need some extra effort on your part, and stuff won't work like it works on linux), but for servers it's a whole another story

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    So, the same what Linux offers.
    Linux lacks simplicity and stability in some cases.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,932

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vertexSymphony View Post
    What's the old saying? Jack of all trades ... master of none?
    The *BSD are horrible for desktop in general (you might use it, but you'll need some extra effort on your part, and stuff won't work like it works on linux), but for servers it's a whole another story
    Why would *BSD be a better server than Linux?

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by brent View Post
    Linux doesn't really focus on anything, and that's one of its problems. It wants to work well on servers, desktop systems and embedded systems alike, with the very same codebase.
    That's a pure bullshit. It works excellent on servers, embedded systems, HPC, desktops etc. It's not surprising it has the highest market share in nearly every market.

  6. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    Linux lacks simplicity and stability in some cases.
    Nope. It's rock stable compared to other operating systems and it's very simple and flexible. Just use proper distribution.

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    Why would *BSD be a better server than Linux?
    It's not and it's proven by market share.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Nope. It's rock stable compared to other operating systems and it's very simple and flexible. Just use proper distribution.
    ext2 is asynchronous by default -> not reliable
    Data loss on power failure or crash with ext4, especially early versions (like 2.6.30).

    Compare /etc.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    389

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    It's not and it's proven by market share.
    This is not proof.
    *BSD might be better server than Linux, because it's more careful with your data ... It doesn't risk for better performance.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    111

    Default

    Why would *BSD be a better server than Linux?
    Except the first sentence, I wasn't talking about linux. never said that one of the BSDs are a better server because I have the coherence that a tool fits the job and not the other way ... and that includes the operating system itself.
    In my own experience and taste, I found that the features of the system are a big PLUS on certain situations ... (ZFS, DTrace, Jails, pf, resource containers, the layout of the base system and ports, etc etc etc)

    *BSD might be better server than Linux, because it's more careful with your data ... It doesn't risk for better performance.
    Which filesystems are you comparing ?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •