Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 18:44:19 +0200 From: Eivind Eklund <eivind@FreeBSD.org> To: j mckitrick <jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org> Cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: BSD, .Net comments - any reponse to this reasoning? Message-ID: <20010710184419.C77023@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20010710173027.A53776@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org>; from jcm@freebsd-uk.eu.org on Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 05:30:27PM %2B0100 References: <20010630174743.A85268@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20010707160255.A18525@thinksec.no> <20010710151059.A52201@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20010710175800.A77023@FreeBSD.org> <20010710173027.A53776@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 05:30:27PM +0100, j mckitrick wrote: > | - The CAM code in FreeBSD, developed by Plutotech for their embedded video > | editing system and contributed back. This is the present basis for the > | FreeBSD SCSI subsystem. > > I had heard FreeBSD has been used in some video post-production software, > but it doesn't seem to get much publicity. I wonder why not? Too far away from what people associate with BSD, I think - and as I said, it is an embedded system. > And why can't BSD be used as a platform for a really good audio editing > application, like CakeWalk is for Win32? It probably can, but the real time issues might make some problems. To be commercially viable, I think the most likely path would be an embedded system based on FreeBSD. Otherwise, we have to look to Open Source. > | - The original PnP support for the ed driver, developed by Yours Truly for Yes > | interactive and donated back to FreeBSD. This also contained a simple but > > So these companies don't care that after paying a consultant to do the work, > the result is effectively given away? Or do they just want a solution for a > problem, and don't care about the code itself? Well, I specifically didn't list companies that just wanted a regular enhancement for the OS for internal use, but kept to companies that have developed proprietary derivates of FreeBSD. All the examples I gave were from companies that did development due to the BSD license allowing them to create proprietary derivates, and most likely would not have done the development if they had to give all their changes back. All the enhancements were (as far as I know) developed by programmers that were full time employees of the respective companies, and were contributed back to FreeBSD because it was seen as giving an economical advantage. There are also companies getting features developed in order to just have the utility value available, similar to what is possible with Linux. One example of such development is the jail code, which was developed by phk working as a consultant. Another is the PAM code in SSH in FreeBSD, which was partially developed and partially ported by me while I worked as a consultant for Enitel. Eivind. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010710184419.C77023>