Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 09:31:38 -0500 From: Rick N <solarux@hotmail.com> To: <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: FreeBSD Popularity Message-ID: <BAY113-W4892373070B4C461BA50E0A1360@phx.gbl> In-Reply-To: <20100306122651.GA46491@orange.esperance-linux.co.uk> References: <4B8ABAB3.1060003@gamozo.org>, <20100228201322.GA82783@rwxrwxrwx.net>, <20100301053514.GA5440@orange.esperance-linux.co.uk>, <11167f521003060044n798a2b3dj23f13f9b9ba5cdbb@mail.gmail.com>, <20100306122651.GA46491@orange.esperance-linux.co.uk>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
somewhere,..., According to Gates, GPLd software (Linux): "makes it impossible for a commercial company to use any of that work or build on any of that work. So what you saw with TCP/IP or Sendmail, NFS,..., or the browser could never happen." I suppose this is exactly why BIG corps like Apple,and Juniper, and ..., chose *BSD code initially, But am I glad that Linux's GPL is protecting my bank card in some ATM ? -careful now. :) > Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2010 12:26:51 +0000 > From: frank@shute.org.uk > To: sfourman@gmail.com > CC: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org; falkman@gamozo.org > Subject: Re: FreeBSD Popularity > > On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 02:44:47AM -0600, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: > > > > > To be honest, I think the licence puts off most of the commercial > > > entities. Which is a *good* thing. > > > > > > > Explain your point on this? BSD is supposed to be commercial friendly. > > > > Sam Fourman Jr. > > I saw Linux go from a sort of hobbiest system to what it is now, where > most of the patches come from RedHat, IBM and Novell. > > These patches are focussed on whatever those big companies are > focussed on ATM which doesn't necessarily coincide with what the > user base wants. > > For instance, who cares that Linux is patched to run on IBM Z-series? > > IBM. Not me. > > So you get a lot of cruft in the kernel which has nothing to do with > the desires of the user base but it's what a PHB at IBM wants. > > Yes, there are companies whom use and support FreeBSD but their say > on FreeBSD development is limited and usually welcome. I'm thinking of > Juniper. > > My belief is that the FreeBSD license puts off the big commercial > players because it's written in clear English and can be written on > half a page of A4. > > This puts the ball in the PHB's court unlike the GPL's reams of > legalese which is punted along to the legal department. i.e the PHB > can pass the buck and hence GPL software is used. > > That's just a guess. I can't think why a license, that allows more > freedom than an obtuse license that is dependent on the uncertain > interpretation of a judge, is used. > > > Regards, > > -- > > Frank > > Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" _________________________________________________________________ Check your Hotmail from your phone. http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9712957help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BAY113-W4892373070B4C461BA50E0A1360>