Same Old BSD Vs LINUX Debate!

I, like most of the people out there, would agree that Unix-style OS is a smart choice. But, the point where I have conflict of opinion is which is the better/superior Unix-style distribution to use. I have installed FreeBSD on my computer, whereas a lot of my friends run Linux (Red Hat, Fedora etc). bsd-windows-linux

I think that BSD communit{y,ies}, generally speaking, understands Linux far better than the Linux communit{y,ies} understands BSD. I have a few theories of my own of why that is, but that’s not really important. I think a lot of Linux users don’t use BSD because they don’t really understand how and why it’s created. Thus, this rant; as a BSD user, I want to make my point, in trying to explain how BSD works (in a way that Linux people can understand and absorb). logo

Both operating systems are have lots of similarities (in most cases), but there are also some major of differences. As you look more closely into the differences, you find that both Linux and BSD emerge from deep-seated disagreements. These disagreements include that over development methodology or deployment and some over its usage. Also, there are debates as to which one is more superior.


But, in this case, in-order to compare “apple with an apple” you need to taste the apple not look at it. What I mean is, that by just comparing the surface, you cannot tell anything properly. It’s the deeper differences that both explain and justify why each group does things the way they do.

What isn’t this? bsd_vs_linux-252x300

  • Similar Commands; ” ‘netstat -rnfinet’ on BSD = ‘netstat -rnAinet’ on Linux”
  • How to administer and run a BSD box.
  • BSD instead of Linux, the advantages.
  • Linux instead of BSD, the pros.
  • Why use this BSD instead of that BSD.
  • Why use this Linux instead of that Linux.
  • Why BSD is Right and Linux is Wrong.
  • Why Linux is Right and BSD is Wrong.

I personally feel that I have the best of the two OS installed on my computer i.e BSD. But, that’s me. I won’t tell you to believe me right off the bat. But, I want you to learn the facts, analyze the origins behind these facts and make your own choice.

Some Differences

There are a lot of difference of opinions between BSD world and the Linux world.

First of all, “Unix”, the trademark is actually a trademark of The Open Group. The code (Unix-the –code) is owned by SCO, whereas the BSDs, in general, are direct-line descendants of the BSD from Berkeley, which was a direct-line descendant of the original AT&T Unix.

So you cannot really say that BSDs are really Unix. In fact, the USL Vs UCB lawsuit episode was also triggered by such statements. But, in many ways, the BSDs can be called direct derivatives of traditional Unix. FreeBSD_Kills_Linux

BSD shows some of its Unix features in the following ways:

  • ·         In the design of the base system
  • ·         The packaging of add-ons
  • ·         In the partitioning of the mass storage.
  • ·         In detail of the commands.
  • ·         The attitudes and reflexes and prejudices of the developers, which are reflected in the code and in the users.

In short, BSD is designed, whereas Linux is grown. Perhaps that’s the only precise way to end this debate. If there is anyone out there who has used BSD and still thinks Linux is better then you are most welcome to explain your point of view in comments. I’d be happy to debate on that.

14 thoughts on “Same Old BSD Vs LINUX Debate!”

  1. BSD is designed and Linux is grown. That’s true.
    But the whole idea of “Linux is thrown together” and “BSD is a complete fine-tuned OS” is a bit overrated and old. Linux distro’s such as Ubuntu are so mature (with Debian’s system) that it would be unfair to say that it’s unstructured and chaotic in use.

    In the end it’s about the applications and MAKING THINGS WORK. And they do with the top Linux distro’s.

    Also, BSD is dying.. as is Unix.
    Maybe sad, but true.

  2. Given that we’re all supposed to be on the same side, I’m not sure why these posts exist.

    I’ve used (Free)BSD and Linux. I chose Linux because ultimately I had more experience with it so it was easier for me to find my way around.

    For some reason BSD wouldn’t read my pendrive, but that might be because I was trying that on a SPARC box and the USB was dodgy.

    I found PC-BSD to be pretty good. Nice graphical installer, good selection of packages.

    Ultimately though, I’m not sure why anyone thinks either Linux or BSD is ‘better’ than the other. There’s very little to tell between them (not like Linux or BSD against Windows, for example) and you can achieve the same on each.

    As a Linux user there’s nothing in BSD to make me want to change. If I were a BSD user, I can’t imagine there’d be much to make me want to change there either!

  3. Unix, as in the code, is not owned by SCO. In SCO v. Novell, it was found that Novell, and not SCO, was the rightful legal owner to the System V Release 4 UNIX operating system and it’s derivatives.

  4. Anyone who says BSD is dying is a damn idiot. The growth rate does not match that of Linux. Steady usage is not dying.

    As far as usage goes I would be more apt to use BSD for a server than a desktop. Linux compatibility layers still have to be installed in order to use BSD as a full functioning desktop.

    But I know that when it comes to stability in a networked environment I would choose BSD over Linux. The stability of the BSD line is far more stable than Linux. Although Linux stability does make other operating systems look like they are built on a sandy foundation.

    You could have this debate all day long and get nowhere. It is as pointless as the KDE vs Gnome debate.

  5. When people say “BSD is dying” it means that BSD has not proven itself useful to JOHN DOE.

    For the *nix l33t sure we can compile programs to work on BSD but how many dumbass JOHN DOE’S can actually do or UNDERSTAND what compile means?

    Bottom line is, BSD still needs a few “hacks” for stuff to work unlike linux where it JUST works.

    This is the main reason why Manufacturers like HP and Asus chose Linux over BSD. You may not like the idea but IT IS easier to use.

    Stability and Security of BSD over Linux has long been used as an argument of BSD FANBOYS but I agree this debate will get nowhere unless you define what you mean by “STABILITY”

    Even Microsoft has published a “MY OS IS MORE STABLE THAN YOURS” argument

  6. I like BSD for a few reasons design wise, but there are some benefits one has in choosing linux that they just dont have with BSD.

    The main reason is the fact that linux has way more bleeding edge software and hardware support. Half the computers Ive owned can’t run BSD well (if at all) because modems, wireless cards, motherboards (ACPI issues), just arent compatible…

    but linux ran just fine on all of them.

    as someone else says it really comes down to what works. Hell windows ME is the best choice if its what gets you the most use out of the computer (unlikely lol)

  7. I find it strange that nobody even mentioned licensing, one of the major differences is that BSD allows more flexible licensing than Linux.

    I would choose BSD over Linux for a server any day, unless I need to run software that doesn’t work on BSD, which is sometimes the case.

    BSD doesn’t really target desktop users as much as Linux does, it’s more geared towards networking and security.

    Also, I would choose OpenBSD over FreeBSD, unless I needed foreign language support which is sadly missing in OpenBSD.

  8. GPL Sucks. thats why people prefer BSD. Keep in mind
    FreeBSD is better than linux
    OpenSSL is always better than GNU TLS
    Apache is better than any other servers
    PostgreSQL rocks, MySQL sucks
    cURL is better than wget
    miaChat is better than phpfreechat
    Phorum is better than PHPBB
    Do you know I stopped visiting wikipedia because GFDL sucks? I am working for a research about visiting Wikipedia.
    I don’t want to be blackmailed and I don’t want to blackmail by choosing copyleft.
    I am interested on creating a list of ‘permissive software’, open source php scripts using PostgreSQL.
    Anyone want to help me, Send a mail by using sourceforge to rishikeshan.

  9. I love linux, its simple and use friendly. My documents is free from VIRUS, no one virus can dstrub me again.

  10. I like both Linux and BSD. I tried Linux first and fall i n love with its simplicity and “freedom theory.” But freedom came with a cost, i.e., you must invest your time and effort to make it works for you. Linux or BSD does not always has drivers for our hardware. Compare with Linux, BSD is much harder to set up. I had tried FreeBSD and failed to get it up and work under GUI. I then tried PCBSD. It was OK with a very ease of installation. However PCBSD does not offer WINE, wireless drive, spell check or supports for other input characters, like Chinese. I tried gcin with ports, yet it does not work for my 64 bits version. Do I think BSD is dying? Yes it is.

  11. For me, it is exactly that Linux is grown that is its benefit.

    The BSD’s are stuck with their design decisions and tend to by more stubborn even if their approach has not rendered best results – the DragonFly BSD addition is an example of such a stubbornness.

    Linux, on the other hand, is far more flexible. It is not afraid to essentially break everything to cater to something which is real-world superior.

    Benchmarks show this quite clearly, across the board the BSD’s cannot compete.

    Design is never better than flexibility, for in the computer industry things change at the drop of a hat. What is the BSD story pertaining to cloud computing, as an example? I do not see one at all, BSD’s are useful where people used to be using Linux – on the periphery of your data center. Linux now offers the features which makes it absolutely necessary for any modern data center to include, yet still does most of the periphery functions better.

    Simple fact of the matter is that while the BSD license is friendly to corporations, it does not require them to improve it in the open, and if they did others can steal their work. Linux is utterly diametric to this. You cannot steal from Linux and release something better without sharing your changes. This means corporations trust that Linux and the GPL in general will not result in giving up your companies advantage, you can more comfortably contribute.

    This has resulted in many of the best improvements to Linux over the years, companies simply wanting to use Linux in some new way and contributing that improvement back. In the BSD world, it is only the BSD developers themselves which improve things, corporations do not give back improvements at all.

    Five years ago, this meant that BSD was a viable option, for Linux did not offer enough features to make it beneficial enough to be forced to give changes back. That has changed drastically, and companies like Facebook, Google, Twitter, none would be possible atop the BSD stack.

    The BSD’s remain far behind Linux on anything relating to the kinds of scalability possible with Linux, this is the same reason even Yahoo has moved away from it – BSD simply cannot sustain the type of traffic these sites are serving. All of this is entirely possibly only because corporations trust that they will also benefit from others if they give this code to the Linux community. It is because they see quite plainly that the benefits outweigh what they are losing by giving away their work.

    The BSD’s have no such security blanket.

Comments are closed.