I have used both NetBSD and FreeBSD and configured X, ppp, 
and installed various packages in both, so here are my fine 
views on both of these (I have not had the opportunity to 
try OpenBSD as yet).

James Buchanan wrote:

> NetBSD has been the easiest for me to learn.  FreeBSD couldn't get X 
> going for me, and OpenBSD is quite minimal with its one CD (there is 

> probably more tho, but NetBSD has 7 CDs for the i386!)


On X: if you really know how to configure X for a given 
piece of hardware, it doesn't really matter which one you 
use because the setup is similar in my limited experience.

On CDs: all three BSD's only require 1 CD for a installation 
of the base OS. In addition, NetBSD and FreeBSD have "mini" 
ISO images available with only the bare essentials for i386 
platforms. FreeBSD's CD also has a few packages thrown in on 
the regular CD (I am not sure about NetBSD since I managed 
to download large portions of it). NetBSD also has CD's 
which can boot on multiple platforms. Some Linux 
distributions have tended to require multiple CD images to 
do even a basic installation.

I believe FreeBSD may actually be easier to download: its 
sets are (or were) available split into smaller chunks for 
an easier time to download over many sessions (I also 
believe it supports or supported floppy installations using 
these split sets [not that this would necessarily be very 
useful :-)]). In the very least, all three BSD's are divided 
into tar archives and I believe all can be manually 
installed. I believe the Slackware Linux distribution is 
similar in this regard regarding split sets, floppies, and 
tar archives (probably manual installs as well).

> 
> OpenBSD's primary goal is security.  It's widely regarded as the most 
> secure OS in existance.  NetBSD and FreeBSD (or any UNIX) are of 
> course concerned with security, but NetBSD has the goals of 
> portability and good, clean code for easy maintenance and bug 
> swatting.  I don't know much about FreeBSD - it seems to like adding 
> new features, check out the FreeBSD 5.0 new technology release.


FreeBSD is probably the most advanced overall for i386 in 
terms of features and performance. A lot of tuning which 
people have to do for NetBSD is unnecessary in FreeBSD also. 
However, I have noticed that NetBSD seems to have much less 
problems with the FFS + softdep combination (file system 
performance). Some things like softdeps, IPV6, USB actually 
appeared in NetBSD first, so it is debatable which is more 
"advanced". OpenBSD is much closer to NetBSD in terms of 
overall features (it is a more recent branch from NetBSD 
than the divergence of NetBSD and FreeBSD), but has its own 
specialization's especially regarding security.

On security: all three have a good emphasis on security, 
although OpenBSD has it on a higher priority (at least it is 
  presented as a higher priority). If you check out CERT's 
web site for vulnerabilities, you will be able to 
objectively asses one metric of security.

> 
> Essentially the difference between the BSDs is that they all derive 
> from 4.4BSD but have different goals (or priorities within these 
> goals) and that's what differentiates the projects.
> 
> I am no expert on BSD however, so go to the respective websites and 
> read, read, read - you come across some good stuff.  Read the FAQs 
> and what the projects are about.  Good info can be seen there.

> 
> Personally, if you are new to BSD, like me, I recommend NetBSD.  I had 
> many failures trying with FreeBSD and OpenBSD.  The NetBSD installer 
> is easier in my opinion.  And I got X working, too.  I run RedHat 
> Linux 8.0 and it was so easy for me to configure GRUB to boot NetBSD 
> for me, too.  I use both regularly, but can't use my dialup Internet 
> connection nor my broadband connection with NetBSD just yet (not that 
> I have tried that heard, still learning the basics of its shell and 

> so  on, upgrading and installing new packages...)

> 
> Cheers
> James
> 
> On Friday 14 February 2003 23:55, fernando@rxp.com wrote:
> 
>>Hi all,
>>just a quick question. What's the difference between OpenBSD,
>>FeeBSD, NetBSD, and any other *BSD that may be out there? And wich
>>one should I be learning?
>>
>>TIA,
>>Fernando
>>
> 
>