OSNews

"You see, they are different but I don't see the differences."

Well, do some heavy benchmarks with FreeBSD, like multiple Firefoxes running, a couple of running videos, and other "stress" tests.
Repeat the same tests on ANY Linux distro, and you'll clearly see "The *BSD difference"

FUD! And massive lack of knowledge.

What advantage would I be seeing when I currently run the most BSD-like Linux distribution (Slackware) with a custom compiled AMD Athlon kernel?

Before I installed the latest release it had been running for months under heavy stress since I use is as a VNC/file server and also compile jobs in VMware/QEMU even running Slackware ports for other architectures.

Aside from that I have Mozilla Firefox running with more than 10 windows each containing more than 15 tabs. So I would like to know if FreeBSD would perform better than this or not. Solaris does not, despite possible advantages for a server as ZFS and zones.

I briefly ran FreeBSD 4.5 on my laptop a few years ago and recently OpenBSD 4.0, both of which didn't perform as well despite the better security they have out of the box.

"You have to understand an operating system to actually see the differences.

This is true. I am a normal user, I don't know the internals of an operating system, this is why I don't see any differences. "

so you can't see the difference between windows, linux and Mac OS X.

What's a "normal user", a user using a browser and email application, surfing at Ebay and Amazon for some minutes? Yes, then you won't see any difference.

For several year? Makes me smile ... I do know a lot of "normal" users which are aware of the differences and they aren't kernel hackers.