I use the various families for various tasks... FreeBSD - web, ftp, dns, mail OpenBSD - kerberos authentication NetBSD - IDS NetBSD seems to run better on 486s than Open or Free, but probably because the code is smaller. I've had better experience with FreeBSD handling higher loads (probably because there is more influence from WC CDROM/BSDi) and SMP (again, the WCC/BSDi influence). And then there is Open. =) Open just plain kicks ass...but I lost my damn CD. Actually, this is pretty sad, but I think I hid it, and now I can't find it. heh heh The BSDs call all do the same thing, but each one has its claim to fame. Free is probably best for servers (like ftp, web, blah blah) that encounter a heavy load. Open is good for systems that need to be extremely tight. Net is good for portability...like for the toaster. I don't prefer one BSD over another, but prefer a particular one for a particular task. I've only run them on x86 processors, and have worked more with Free than Net, but they all equally kick ass and take names. =) marco ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, December 07, 2000 1:23 PM Subject: Re: NetBSD > > Do you prefer NetBSD over FreeBSD on i386 architectures? > If so, why? Just curious. > > > D > > * On Wed, Dec 06, 2000 at 11:15:20AM -0700, Mark Peoples wrote: > > For any other BSD fanatics out there (like myself ), the NetBSD team has > > released version 1.5 today... 1.4.3 just came out a few days ago. =) > > > > I'll be grabbing the ISO (hopefully) today, and can get a few copies made if > > anyone would like one (x86 code). > > > > marco > > > ________________________________________________ > See http://PLUG.phoenix.az.us/navigator-mail.shtml if your mail doesn't post to the list quickly and you use Netscape to write mail. > > Plug-discuss mailing list - Plug-discuss@lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us > http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss >