I think this is a bit limiting. FreeBSD's networking performance can be significantly higher than OpenBSD's (although IMO OpenBSD's pf has nicer syntax), so it'

I think this is a bit limiting. FreeBSD's networking performance can be significantly higher than OpenBSD's (although IMO OpenBSD's pf has nicer syntax), so it's a great firewall choice. Similarly, on desktop, OpenBSD can be pretty nice if you're a developer comfortable in the terminal; it runs the same graphics drivers as FreeBSD and Linux (other than NVIDIA). It's defaults tend to be a bit more sensible on desktop/laptops too IMO as its developers are more likely to dogfood it. There's been good progress on NetBSD desktops over the past few years as well, but I'm less familiar with it, so I can't comment too much. With regards to portability, NetBSD supports more systems, but often I've found that OpenBSD is a little bit more stable on the ones they do support as they insist on not using cross compilation: so every system they do support is at least stable enough to build itself, which is a good stress test, especially on older machines.