OpenBSD vs Windows: What are the differences?

# Introduction

1. **Kernel**: OpenBSD uses a monolithic kernel, while Windows uses a hybrid kernel that includes aspects of both monolithic and micro kernels. This difference results in OpenBSD being more security-focused and stable, with a simpler design, whereas Windows offers better hardware support and performance due to its hybrid model.
   
2. **Licensing**: OpenBSD uses a permissive open-source license (BSD License), allowing users to freely modify and distribute the code with minimal restrictions. In contrast, Windows is proprietary software with restrictive licensing terms, limiting users' ability to modify and distribute the operating system.

3. **Security**: OpenBSD is known for its strong focus on security, with a proactive approach to fixing vulnerabilities and promoting secure coding practices. Windows, on the other hand, has faced numerous security issues over the years and is a frequent target for malware and cyberattacks due to its widespread usage.

4. **Customizability**: OpenBSD is highly customizable, allowing users to tailor the operating system to their specific needs and remove unnecessary components for a minimalist setup. Windows, while offering some customization options, is more rigid in its configuration and often includes bundled software that cannot be easily removed.

5. **Community Support**: The OpenBSD community is known for its emphasis on documentation, code purity, and support for open standards. In comparison, Windows users rely on Microsoft for support, updates, and troubleshooting, with a more centralized and commercial approach to addressing user needs.

6. **Resource Usage**: OpenBSD is lightweight and resource-efficient, making it well-suited for older hardware or devices with limited resources. In contrast, Windows tends to be more demanding in terms of system resources, requiring newer hardware for optimal performance, especially with newer versions of the operating system.

# Summary

In Summary, OpenBSD and Windows differ significantly in their kernel design, licensing, security focus, customizability, community support, and resource usage.