Sorry for noob question, but why would one use OpenBSD instead of FreeBSD? I like latter, but also hear good things about former, although there are some limitations (e.g. no ZFS).
Simplicity. I have a long love for FreeBSD, but the project has different aims than OpenBSD.
Linux and FreeBSD are novels. OpenBSD strives to be a short poem.
Linux and FreeBSD push really hard to add cutting-edge features, but OpenBSD pushes hard to see what can be removed and still retain essential functionality. OpenBSD packs a remarkable amount of functionality into a code footprint that doesn’t feel like it has grown appreciably since I first ran it in the late 90s.
At the same time, this flensing process has allowed OpenBSD to move quickly on some innovations like “doas” instead of sudo. They also maintain cononical implementations of their other products like OpenSSH and were able to move quickly to their cleaned-up OpenSSL implementation LibreSSL.
As for laptop support, I wouldn’t say their hardware support compares to Linux. That is, they don’t support everything. Rather, for supported laptop (and desktop!) hardware, that suppport is excellent. Put another way: that which is supported is supported very well.
t's very compact and simple and you don't need Google to solve problems because the base system is thoroughly documented.
It has everything I need, and nothing more.
OpenBSD isn't suitable for every use case because rarely used features tend to get removed instead of falling into disrepair from lack of maintenance, but when it does work, it works predictably and reliably. I was able to run OpenBSD on my desktop and have everything work flawlessly out-of-the-box, whereas with FreeBSD I encountered frequent crashes when using dual monitors. I suppose my configuration isn't something that the FreeBSD developers use, so while it "works", it doesn't work.
In the end I returned to Linux because I sometimes play games using Steam and Wine, neither of which is likely to ever be supported on OpenBSD, but if OpenBSD provides everything you need, it's certainly worth trying it out.
* security -- the code is audited and hardened to a greater degree than any other general purpose OS on the planet (embedded safety critical microkernel systems would be the exception)
* routing suite -- one of the most well integrated open source routing suites out there (alternatives include BIRD and free range routing / quagga)
* firewall -- their firewall is flexible, fully featured, and easy to configure. It has been adopted by other BSDs, but development and new features happen in OpenBSD first.
Weaknesses of OpenBSD:
performance -- security is valued over optimized code, so the OS will not be as efficient or handle as many connections as a Linux or FreeBSD server could
* lack of ZFS
Compared to OpenBSD, FreeBSD has a slightly worse firewall implementation (originally sourced from OpenBSD), better networking and computing performance, and ZFS.
What type of device are you considering using OpenBSD or FreeBSD for?
Linux and FreeBSD are novels. OpenBSD strives to be a short poem.
Linux and FreeBSD push really hard to add cutting-edge features, but OpenBSD pushes hard to see what can be removed and still retain essential functionality. OpenBSD packs a remarkable amount of functionality into a code footprint that doesn’t feel like it has grown appreciably since I first ran it in the late 90s.
At the same time, this flensing process has allowed OpenBSD to move quickly on some innovations like “doas” instead of sudo. They also maintain cononical implementations of their other products like OpenSSH and were able to move quickly to their cleaned-up OpenSSL implementation LibreSSL.
As for laptop support, I wouldn’t say their hardware support compares to Linux. That is, they don’t support everything. Rather, for supported laptop (and desktop!) hardware, that suppport is excellent. Put another way: that which is supported is supported very well.