From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 6 00:17:24 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E581D106564A for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 00:17:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 85F568FC1C for ; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 00:17:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p060HLNG085594; Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:17:21 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from scottl@samsco.org) Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1082) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Scott Long In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2011 17:17:21 -0700 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20110103220153.69cf59e0@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110104082252.45bb5e7f@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110105124045.6a0ddd1a@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110105175926.GA2101@vniz.net> To: Jeff Roberson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1082) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-50.0 required=3.8 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=unavailable version=3.3.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.0 (2010-01-18) on pooker.samsco.org Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux kernel compatability X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 00:17:25 -0000 On Jan 5, 2011, at 5:14 PM, Jeff Roberson wrote: > On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Andrey Chernov wrote: >=20 >> On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 12:40:45PM -0500, Alexander Kabaev wrote: >>>> I have heard this argument about the linuxulator and what we're >>>> really talking about is slipping FreeBSD marketshare. I don't = share >>>> the view that the linuxulator futhered this slip but rather my view >>>> is that it allows us to stay relevant in areas where companies can >>>> not justify an independent FreeBSD effort. Adobe is a good example >>>> of this. >>>>=20 >>>=20 >>> It compounded the Adobe's reluctance to work on portable flash = player. >>=20 >> I agree with Alexander even more. We don't need _any_ Linux emulator = in >> the tree and even in the ports. Flash player is a good example of how >> Linux emulator is harmful: instead of sending tons of complaints to = Adobe >> to force them to make native FreeBSD version, users tends to install = Flash >> via emulator and got all its pain as result. >=20 > There are not enough freebsd desktop users to justify the effort even = if everyone of them sent an email in. >=20 > I once offered to port recent vmware to BSD for free and they turned = me down because they didn't want to deal with it. >=20 > We have not been marginalized in this space because we have an = emulator. We just don't have the marketshare in many areas. If = anything, these emulators improve our marketshare. I agree entirely. Companies look at marketshare and ability to turn = more revenue than costs (i.e. profit). Like Jeff, I've had my share of = dealing with companies who have made a conscious to support or not = support FreeBSD based on those factors. Petitions and letters sound = great on Slashdot, but don't work in the real world. Emulation = increases marketshare. Scott