Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2001 21:21:55 -0800 From: "Ted Mittelstaedt" <tedm@toybox.placo.com> To: "lists" <lists@vivdev.com> Cc: <freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: RE: FreeBSD & GNU Message-ID: <002d01c0b4eb$82136fc0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com> In-Reply-To: <v04003a00b6e303167e9a@[192.168.1.100]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>-----Original Message----- >From: lists [mailto:lists@vivdev.com] >>to happen was when Apple chose the codebase to jumpstart their MacOS >>X/Darwin effort, >>and they chose FreeBSD. >> > >I haven't followed this at all, could you elaborate a bit on the extent to >which OS X is FreeBSD? > MacOS X is Apple's new operating system for their Macintoshs. See the following: http://www.apple.com/macosx/ It is built from a mix of NEXT code and FreeBSD 3.2, see http://www.apple.com/darwin/ >>We are rapidly seeing the institutionalizing of the Open Source software >>market. >[snip] >> >>It's sad in a way, because FreeBSD and Linux are going down the same road >>that MS-DOS and Windows went down. > >Could you elaborate on how this is possible? I always understood that DOS >was turned into the commercial juggernaut that it became because gates et >al controlled the source code. No, no NO!!! MS-DOS was NOT turned into a juggernaut because Gates controlled the source code. It was turned into a juggernaut because the PC community decided for a number of reasons (cost, marketing, features, etc.) to standardize on it. > But isn't the source for FreeBSD open? I >really do not have a clue here, and it is an interesting forecast on a >number of levels. > The problem with Windows right now in a nutshell is that the vast majority of Wintel users have standardized on it. I won't go into why, it's not relevent to this discussion. The problem with single-source standardization (or institutionalizing, as it's called) is that once the market has standardized on a single-source, that source normally has absolutely no incentive to continue to improve and upgrade their product, ie: make it better, stronger, faster. Now, in many markets, this is not a problem. For example, take electric power. Well, there's little that can be done to improve the quality of electric power that's sold to end users today. About the only thing that can possibly be done is to offer stuff like more expensive "green" power, and see if people are willing to spend the extra $10 per month to save the salmon. (in all areas this has been tried people won't spend the extra $10) The same goes for water, sewer, etc. But, in the software market it's a severe problem. The institutionalizing of Windows has resulted in successive generations of Windows software that are fatter, slower, more expensive, more bugs, and in general they don't improve the lot of the end user. In the history of marketing, there's never been a single source supplier that has lasted for more than a blink of an eye, just due to this issue. The computer market for mid-level server software has followed this same path. In the past, the market institutionalized "big iron" software like VMS from DEC, and when Vomit Making System began to stagnate, they rejected it and turned to UNIX servers. Then, the UNIX server market stagnated and they rejected it and turned to Novell NetWare 386. Then NetWare stagnated and they turned to Windows NT. Now, Windows NT/2K is starting to stagnate and the market is beginning to turn back to UNIX for mid-level server software. In 5-10 years, UNIX will have ascended and be institutionalized and, if the past is any guide, it will start stagnating again, and someone else's server software will make an entrance. And, so it goes. The one thing that HAS changed in the computer market is that the cycles of ascendency and downfall have gotten longer and longer, much faster. This is directly due to the number of computers - the more of them the more sluggish and evolutionary the market responds. However, don't make the mistake that is always repeated and think that just because the computer market has gotten elephantine, that it's stopped responding to the problems of a monopolistic supplier. One of the biggest problems we have today in the market is with hardware suppliers like Dell that force the user to purchase Microsoft Windows with purchase of a new system. The reason this happens is because Microsoft has signed a deal with Dell to where they will sell OEM Windows to Dell at $20 a copy - Dell is then permitted to sell the copies for $100. There is nothing wrong with this except the catch is that the contract requires Dell to sell _a windows copy of some sort_ with ALL of their hardware systems. It is this kind of contract language that the Justice Department lawsuit is aimed at stopping. Do you realize that once the Supreme Court has upheld the judgement against Microsoft (which is what eventually is going to happen) even if the company is not broken up, that once they are defined as a monopoly, that contracts like this between Dell and Microsoft will be illegal. It will then be possible for a Class Action lawsuit to be filed against Dell by all Dell purchasers that will force Dell to make millions of dollars in payments to people that return their Windows licenses and sign a statement guarenteeing that they don't use Windows (and use Linux or something like that) Once that happens it is going to guarentee that all major name-brand suppliers of PC hardware will stop requiring users to purchase Windows with purchase of a new system. This is the scenario that Microsoft fears far more than simply splitting up the company. Once they can no longer force Windows down the market's throat, you will start seeing Windows penetration figures drop from the mid 90% down to 60% within a year. This is also why suppliers like Compaq are now offering Linux as an OS choice. For example, I own a copy of Windows 98 on a system that I bought a year ago. Next year I buy a new Compaq intended to replace my current system - and since I want to still run Windows 98 on it, I simply specify Linux as the OS and thus I don't have to pay twice for the Windows 98 license. Now, granted, the user that I sell my old system to will not have a Windows license for it, but that's his problem. Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?002d01c0b4eb$82136fc0$1401a8c0>