If you want to say one is better, then you ought to at least define what being better means. "better" clearly does not mean the same thing to both of us. Linux

If you want to say one is better, then you ought to at least define what being better means. "better" clearly does not mean the same thing to both of us. Linux does have plenty of nice things and plenty of nice work, but I am not going to dismiss everything being done elsewhere by declaring Linux to be "better". At best, I would say that it is ahead in some areas, behind in other areas and the same in many areas. As for what some of those "other areas" are, I recall Adrian Chadd implementing time division multiplexed atheros wifi support in FreeBSD that Linux does not have. Netflix also contributed a rather nice thing to FreeBSD that Linux did not have: http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/04/it-wasnt-easy-but-netflix-will-soon-use-https-to-secure-video-streams/ http://arstechnica.com/security/2015/04/it-wasnt-easy-but-ne... There are plenty of nice things in both platforms. Labelling one as "better" just doesn't do justice to either of them. It ignores opportunities for the "better" one to improve by denying that opportunities for improvement have been demonstrated to exist. It also denies the "lesser" one the acknowledgement of having done something worth while.