From owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Feb 13 16:09:01 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E5DD16A4CE for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 16:09:01 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rambo.401.cx (rambo.401.cx [80.65.205.166]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 974A143D2F for ; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 16:09:00 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from listsub@401.cx) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (rocky [192.168.200.2]) by rambo.401.cx (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j1DG8q6g014430; Sun, 13 Feb 2005 17:08:53 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from listsub@401.cx) Message-ID: <420F7BF5.6010602@401.cx> Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 17:10:29 +0100 From: "Roger 'Rocky' Vetterberg" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Erich Dollansky References: <20050213004204.GA91920@xor.obsecurity.org> <20050213021055.69766.qmail@web53901.mail.yahoo.com> <20050213022605.GA24426@xor.obsecurity.org> <420ED112.80401@pacific.net.sg> <420EDF52.1090408@nbritton.org> <420EE518.9070605@pacific.net.sg> <20050213055831.GB8532@grover.logicsquad.net> <420EF423.7020609@pacific.net.sg> <20050213064500.GD8532@grover.logicsquad.net> <420EFBA2.4000106@pacific.net.sg> In-Reply-To: <420EFBA2.4000106@pacific.net.sg> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 0506-1, 2005-02-11), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Re: The only worthwhile logo-related comments so far.... X-BeenThere: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD Evangelism List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 16:09:01 -0000 Erich Dollansky wrote: [doing some snipping again] > > The point is the lack of a company supporting FreeBSD like IBM > does for Linux, is a reason for companies not to take FreeBSD > as they cannot turn back to that company if things go wrong. > > All the potential user sees is currently this small group > called 'core' which is obviously to small to give the same > support like IBM - or any other huge company - could give. Linux is controlled by Linus Torvalds, who clearly is outnumbered by core by an order of magnitute. I fail to see why core directing the project makes it impossible to gain support from IBM or any other giant. > Even if the support would be locally handled by some small > company, the potential customer just wants to be able to call > the big boy in case something goes the wrong way. Very true. And to get some big boy to stand behind FreeBSD, I think its vital that the projects improves its image from teenage playground to industry strenght software. > > As mentioned before, I know that FreeBSD became what it is > because core exists. Also true. I think the development model of FreeBSD works very well and see no need to change anything. But I do think that on the surface, FreeBSD does a helluva job hiding how organized and professional it really is, and I would like to change that. -- R