Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 15:38:12 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: chat@FreeBSD.ORG, Alex Zepeda <jazepeda@pacbell.net> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Subject: Re: Opera ports to QNX but not BSD Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20010515153137.044ee4d0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20010515142152.A12190@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20010515141341.B714@zippy.mybox.zip> <4.3.2.7.2.20010515112511.045e75b0@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20010515112511.045e75b0@localhost> <20010515121629.A10144@xor.obsecurity.org> <4.3.2.7.2.20010515131451.00b13950@localhost> <20010515140528.A11778@xor.obsecurity.org> <20010515141341.B714@zippy.mybox.zip>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 03:21 PM 5/15/2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: >"No, no, please don't give us your wads of money, IBM, it will be bad >for our business." Right-o, Brett. If IBM distracts Opera from a larger and more lucrative market, then, yes, it's bad for Opera's business. What's more, IBM is not in the habit of just giving companies wads of money. Like many large companies, it often provides a small amount of money and hints that larger amounts may follow. But they often don't. Doing business with a large company such as IBM is a big risk. >It seems you've confused chat@FreeBSD.org with a Wind River >suggestions box. A number of people who care about the future of Wind River and BSDi are present here. There's certainly nothing wrong with giving them a "heads up" in this forum, especially when an announcement indicates that a competitor is gaining an edge. >> Of course, we might have seen a BSD port much sooner had the BSDs >> not made the incredibly unwise mis-step of incorporating support >> for Linux binaries. By doing this rather than making a BSD API >> emulator for Linux, they've guaranteed that Linux development >> will come first and BSD development last. This is just one more >> case where it's happened. > >Yeah, that would have been a smart move..then I just couldn't run >Opera on FreeBSD at all. That would certainly show them. In fact, it would. They developed for BeOS, for example, because BeOS users couldn't just muddle through with emulation/binary compatibility. The presence of the Linux ABI relegated the BSDs to the back burner. >P.S. Just so you know, when you turn this thread into one of your >interminable rants about the mistakes FreeBSD is making and how you >have all the answers about what we should be doing, I will be firmly >ignoring you. You are perfectly within your rights to ignore me if you so choose. But it seems to me that this would be playing "ostrich," as so many in the BSD world seem to do. --Brett Glass To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20010515153137.044ee4d0>