Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 20:27:07 +0200 (CEST) From: Jeroen Ruigrok/Asmodai <asmodai@wxs.nl> To: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in> Cc: Kris Kennaway <kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au>, advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: RE: Some thoughts on advocacy (was: Slashdot ftp.cdrom.com upgra Message-ID: <XFMail.990502202707.asmodai@wxs.nl> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9905022333100.7536-100000@theory1.physics.iisc.ernet.in>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 02-May-99 Rahul Siddharthan wrote:
>> But fair is fair, both advocates tend to border on the brink of
>> zealotry,
>> but isn't that always the point in advocacy? Advocacy always assumes one
>> product is better in a certain aspect than the other product...
>
> Fine when you're talking about the product. My point was:
> try to boost your product without putting down the other. (Linux
> advocates have the same problem in pushing linux over windows: if
> you badmouth windows, the typical happy windows user won't
> listen. Though the *unhappy* one probably will. Keep in mind that
> there are very few unhappy linux users, so the FreeBSD problem is
> much more difficult.)
Correct, but there's a couple of drawbacks on every advocacy solution...
As far as we have been able to discern FreeBSD currently doesn't want to
get the majority of the Linux users simply because of the support issues.
Sure we are reponsive and carry one of the best mailinglists around, but
there are multitudes of people using Linux who seem to think that using an
OS doesn't require thinking... Call it elitism, I find it merely a good
seperation of attitudes... Linux is more suited for beginning Unix users,
but FreeBSD qualifies for it as well... *shrug* Is one of them both even
worse than the other? They both kick a dozen other OS's arses...
> But to push this "my product is better than yours" thing to the
> licensing is surely going a bit too far...
Is it? The GNU site would like us to think otherwise, they criticize the
BSD License on a few points in order to make the reader prefer the GPL...
Licenses are akin to products... Really...
> Historical note: the GPL was created by one Richard Stallman, who
> believes that any restrictions on software modification/redistribution
> is unethical.
Stallman is a twit... 'nough said... Fact proven time and again...
Restrictions on software are a companies right... We all know that it works
otherwise with Open Source, even better for a large number of projects...
Some things just need to be proprietary in order to maintain
vendor/market share...
---
Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven asmodai(at)wxs.nl
The FreeBSD Programmer's Documentation Project
Network/Security Specialist <http://home.wxs.nl/~asmodai>;
*BSD: Powered by Knowledge & Know-how <http://www.freebsd.org>;
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.990502202707.asmodai>