Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 11:33:11 -0700 (MST) From: Nate Williams <nate@yogotech.com> To: Jordan Hubbard <jkh@osd.bsdi.com> Cc: bsddiy@21cn.com, nate@yogotech.com, asmodai@wxs.nl, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Re[2]: The Project and onward [was: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet ip_output.c] Message-ID: <15025.2791.250383.769184@nomad.yogotech.com> In-Reply-To: <20010315002819G.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> References: <15023.42384.196115.528084@nomad.yogotech.com> <20010314104836N.jkh@osd.bsdi.com> <1952303922.20010315090121@21cn.com> <20010315002819G.jkh@osd.bsdi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > JH> Our strategy has never been anything more "brilliant" than fixing > > JH> bugs, updating tools, writing drivers for new hardware > > > > sigh, is this FreeBSD strategy? if there isn't innovate in FreeBSD in > > furture, I'd leave away now. :( > > I think you're confused - please read what I said again. I'm > describing a state of affairs, I'm not saying FreeBSD will never be > innovative. I rather hope it will be, in fact. > > Nate and I fundamentally disagree as to where one defines *any*, > operating system vendor as "innovative" today. I don't happen to > think that any one of the mainstream players are truly innovative, not > Linux, not Microsoft, not Sun, not even BSD, and I don't care how many > times you rewrite the VM system or create new filesystems for any of > the above. That's a fair statement. I consider the above innovation, and Jordan does not. Given my experience with companies lately, there is a *heck* of alot more innovation or whatever you want to call it happening in FreeBSD than in the other mainstream OS's. Companies are patenting ideas that are *much* less innovative and obvious than the changes that have happened and/or will be happening in FreeBSD. > To do any of that is to simply *extend* things within your classic > design model, you're not doing the software equivalent of jumping from > incandescent to fluorescent lighting or going from piston to > jet-powered aircraft. Using your arguments, there have been real innovations since Orville and Wilbur did their thing. Moving from a single-threaded to a multi-threaded kernel *is* real innovation, as it radically effects the entire model, sort of like piston -> jet power. Yes, there are still wings on the plane, but underneath everything is re-tooled for a different power plant. But, I guess we can disagree on what we consider innovation. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15025.2791.250383.769184>