Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2005 09:05:44 -0400 From: Bart Silverstrim <bsilver@chrononomicon.com> To: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: Josh Ockert <torstenvl@gmail.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Spam:****, RE: Demon license? Message-ID: <c79eff69e8b5323905073470c1cadf5c@chrononomicon.com> In-Reply-To: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNEEALFCAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNEEALFCAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Jul 20, 2005, at 6:15 AM, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Bart >> Silverstrim >> Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 9:45 AM >> To: Josh Ockert >> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Ted Mittelstaedt >> Subject: Re: Demon license? >> >> FreeBSD doesn't need strings attached via corporate entanglements, in >> my opinion. >> > > FreeBSD already has entangling corporate strings - Apple is one of > the entanglers for example. But, interestingly enough, none of those > people are complaining about this issue. As I understand it Apple is using some of the code from FreeBSD, but FreeBSD isn't necessarily *getting* anything as an obligation from them. Ideally, if businesses give to them, that's a bonus. Businesses have always been able to take from FreeBSD as per it's license without giving anything. But when you start doing tit-for-tat scratch-my-back-and-I'll-scratch-yours relationships with businesses, there's going to be problems. >> when it comes to free-source operating systems, it is a >> geek's party and the market promoters are the crashers. > > Hear hear! Why is the concept so hard for people to understand that "open source" projects aren't necessarily out to displace Windows or take over the world...that they were spawned by a desire to scratch an itch or make something that's good and fills a need. There are those who create things with some motivation to purely outdo Windows, no doubt...but for the most part it's just made to be made, without obligations? If the "product" works for you, you're allowed to use it. Use FreeBSD. Use GPL tools, use the Linux kernel to build a better distro, whatever. But why must people be driven to take these projects to start dancing with corporate sponsors and cash?? If you want to do that, do it the way "Linux" has...start a corporation using that product as the basis, and approach the businesses you're interested in courting, and leave the core project alone. Businesses aren't interested in the core Linux kernel necessarily...they work with a corporation that uses it. The corporation gives a point of contact, a point of support, a face to work with. If it goes out of business it's a case of touch noogies...the actual project itself isn't bothered one way or the other and is still available on the Internet for free with people spending their free time working on it as a hobby. *sigh* Not that it really matters in the end...que sera, sera, right?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?c79eff69e8b5323905073470c1cadf5c>