Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2001 01:40:50 -0500 From: Laurence Berland <stuyman@confusion.net> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: lists <lists@vivdev.com>, freebsd-newbies@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD & GNU Message-ID: <3ABD92F2.2355C13A@confusion.net> References: <002d01c0b4eb$82136fc0$1401a8c0@tedm.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
First off, in case anyone is interested, there's a great map of unix history at http://perso.wanadoo.fr/levenez/unix/ I had printed this out last summer, and we hung it in the office under the heading "edumakayshun" or some such. Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > > >-----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/ > I think there's also some NetBSD in there at some point, and lest we forget, via NeXT we get Mach. > >>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. > Part of this, of course, has to do with Gates's ruthless (and unethical/illegal) business practices. > > 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. Standardization isn't always bad. FreeBSD would tend not to stagnate I suspect, because the people writing it are also some of the people using it. They want new features, they write new features. Open source publicly developed software is much more resistive to this effect. Also note, I think it's sad that people are so shortsighted and selfish to not spend the ten dollars and save the salmon. > > 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. It gets better. Anyone who bought a dell can sue, whether they use windows or not, if they paid for that license. They can claim they chose windows because they'd already had a copy and didnt want to incur further cost. Though I suspect it's Microsoft, and not Dell, who you sue. Dell was simply being intimidated by MS's illegal biz practice (at least in legalistic theory) > > 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. > At least in the server market. I suspect desktop transitions will be more gradual. > 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. > MS will try and change all this with their whole product activation scheme. Prediction: This will inconvenience and piss *a lot* of people off, namely almost everyone. It will not stop piracy, the implementation will be as full of swiss cheese as everything else redmond cares to mess up, and in the end they'll alienate a customer base that (as a result of the above mentioned litigation) are no longer being shoved into MS. Make me eat my words, Mr. Ballmer. I dare ya. L > Ted Mittelstaedt tedm@toybox.placo.com > Author of: The FreeBSD Corporate Networker's Guide > Book website: http://www.freebsd-corp-net-guide.com Ps: I'm sure you know, but the chapter of the book in DN is still incomplete. I presume it's your publisher, and not you, who has the problem. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-newbies" in the body of the message -- Laurence Berland Intern, Flooz.com Northwestern '04 stuyman@confusion.net http://www.isp.northwestern.edu/~laurence "The world has turned and left me here" 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?3ABD92F2.2355C13A>