NetBSD 6.0 Is On Approach With New Features

[uid313]

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.

[vertexSymphony]

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

[LightBit]

So, the same what Linux offers.

Linux lacks simplicity and stability in some cases.

[uid313]

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?

[kraftman]

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.

[kraftman]

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.

[kraftman]

Why would *BSD be a better server than Linux?

It's not and it's proven by market share.

[LightBit]

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.

[LightBit]

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.

[vertexSymphony]

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 ?