Hello,
FreeBSD looks apparently much better than linux, and benefits of linux apps:
http://people.freebsd.org/~murray/bsd_flier.html

BSD has better filesystem (comp. to ext2/ext3)
BSD is more secured
BSD is better for drivers...
Lot of people as I been said are very happy of their BSD. Also Mac choosed BSD, and not Linux.

Have you more information , opinions, ... ? So should we switch from Linux to Bsd ?

My opinion is: this debate has been rehashed a thousand times over. Ask the same question on different forums and you'll get different answers.

Choose the OS that fits your needs best. Choose the license that fits your needs best.

I actually never heard about BSD. Everyone talks about Linux, but it looks that BSD is better than Linux.

Most of my friends only know other : mac or windows or linux.
But BSD no one never heard about that ...
Sorry

Heard about it (FreeBSD) from time to time, never tried it.
As I know, Slackware is most BSD-like Linux distribution, so FreeBSD should be worth trying - for me.

P.S. There is also OpenBSD, which you didn't mention.

Actually its more like Slackware is the most Unix like. BSD is Unix.

The advantages of Linux over BSD tend to be hardware support and software.

That comparison chart is outdated, biased, and wrong. I'm guessing it's age based on the references to the "ext2" file system and upcoming "2.4 release" of Linux.

Some distributions of Linux have traditionally made it hard to install non-Free drivers, but others don't, and even Debian has moved toward making it easier to install them. At the time of that comparison chart, it may have been fair to say Debian was among the distributions that was hard to install non-Free drivers on.

While theoretically the BSD license model may make BSD have an advantage--on a level playing field--the playing field is not level. There's a larger user base for Linux, and even when there is no vendor support at all this means more the support from independently developed open source drivers. Unfair or not, there were and are more commercial players with deep pockets pumping money into Linux development than BSD development.

As for software, it's rather silly to say FreeBSD has just one centralized Ports collection but there's no equivalent in Linux. FreeBSD isn't all of BSD. Similarly, Debian isn't all of Linux. FreeBSD's Ports tree is the equivalent of Debian's repositories (note--at the time of that chart, no Ubuntu exists).

At the time of that chart, Red Hat would have been the most popular Linux distribution, and most of those criticisms would have been fair for RED HAT. Red Hat's rpm system is a mess, and was even worse back then before rpm distros attempted to emulate Debian's package management system.

The filesystem and security are debatable (that link goes to a BSD maintainer's page, expect some bias)

Linux is FAR better for the number and quality of drivers available, is available for many architectures, has many times the number of people working on it, performance benchmarks show that it will (or already has) surpassed BSD, and so on....

...and Mac chose BSD because it had a license they liked, while Linux is GPL.

I don't mean to knock BSD here, I'm just saying that everything there can be debated to no end...

Just to repeat--that comparison chart is OLD.

Windows 2000? Ext2, and no journaling file systems? Upcoming 2.4 kernel hasn't been released yet? Red Hat 7?

for instance if you get installed FreeBSD:

you can forget about SKYPE : http://www.skype.com/intl/en/downloa.../linux/choose/

Am I Right ?

What does it matter? There are other great Voip apps that are open source, like Ekiga and Wengophone.

Well since most of friends are XP users, wengophone and ekiga, or even gizmo, are rather buggy between microsoft-linux And skype even if closed works better with all persons (they dont want to install wengophone just skype )

Actually with the by including the ZFS filesystem BSD has an edge on Linux there.
That wont help with the driver situation though.

I just love the attitude of the BSD guys towards RMS.

What kinda bugs me about FreeBSD, is their stance on journaled filesystems. Soft-updates were always mentioned as the alternative, since 'officially' FreeBSD did not have any journaling on their UFS. Now, they are adding ZFS support, and XFS both experimental and I doubt FreeBSD will utilize those as / partition. Though the developers and documentation for FreeBSD was always; 'soft-updates great' 'journaling bad, no need for journaling at all'.

What did struck me as odd was this, from wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FreeBSD#FreeBSD_7
There, UFS journaling, but I messed with FreeBSD 7 in VMWare, and when it came time for partitioning, I found nothing on enabling journaling, just UFS, or UFS with soft-updates. So now it seems that there are mixed messages.

I am not so sure about our EXT3 partitions ... I think there is much better. Google have even their own partition type Fs. Well, couldnt be bad to inherit it. Looks that it works for google.

A little question, since apparently FreeBsd is better and faster than linux for Servers, wouldnt be better to have the main server of the /home powered by BSD rather than linux?

I recently got a crash of the ext3 (not the first time) ... (bit fed up)

Happy tux