Date: Thu, 14 Nov 1996 12:16:02 -0800 From: "Pedro Giffuni S." <m230761@ingenieria.ingsala.unal.edu.co> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [comp.os.linux.announce] xpdf 0.6 - a PDF viewer for X Message-ID: <328B7E02.6076@ingenieria.ingsala.unal.edu.co> References: <4962.847977845@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jordan: You´ve got a point..but someone asked me once "Well if I wanted to use Linux´s binaries why not just use Linux from the start?". Linux is not well known in this country (Can you believe that?), and I preferred FreeBSD for stability reasons and because you always know what to expect from BSD code, but there is a point there: how do Linux´s binaries perform under FreeBSD? Although Linux´s code is freely available, I wouldn´t expect the same speed of a native Linux. No doubt Linux´s emulation is important, but does it mean we should start using Linux´s netscape instead of BSDI's or an eventual FreeBSD native? Should WC ship Acrobar Reader for Linux on it´s Fbsd CD? Of course commercial apps are different, we simply cannot say "I won´t run Lotus because it is not ported for FreeBSD". I believe it´s cool to be able to run Linux´s binaries, but all UNIX´s are so similar (specially if FreeBSD finally becomes POSIX) that it shouldn´t be difficult to maintain a version for several platforms. Yes I agree we don´t have the market Linux has, and it´s good to have software available for Linux, but we are not Linux and we should hope (some day... surely not now) to have our own binaries. My personal war against MS, is just because I got tired of seeing the same OS everywhere, and the same Microsoft products. One day "Big Brother Bill" may decide the only valid development environment is Visual Basic and we´ll have to obey. Actually I use OS2, they face a problem similar to ours: their costumer base is small, and they had to emulate Windows... evidently the strategy didn´t work (although their product has always been better), and they are not supporting directly win95 on their new version. Pedro. Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > > IMHO native ports always have precedence over Linux´s binaries. I > > believe all good software should be made available for FreeBSD natively: > > we shouldn´t encourage Linux´s development! (I don´t have anything > > against LINUX..I only hate Microsoft 8*) ) > > Erm, your statement somewhat contradicts itself. :-) > > If you want to combat Microsoft, then your objective should be to get > vendors to port to *any* free operating system, be it Linux or *BSD, > since at least then you're getting validation from them that the free > operating systems are worth supporting and that the product's finished > the minute their Win95 version is done. > > As a former ISV, I also know that they *hate* having to support 47 > different platforms since each and every platform, no matter now nice > it is, simply costs money to support. I'd like to get our Linux > emulation to the point where we can run any of their apps "out of the > box", with no additional work in hunting down Linux libraries > required. That would, to me, be far more valuable than beating on a > lot of vendors to increase their production costs by producing FreeBSD > native binaries. > > Let me put it another way - were I still working for Lotus, I would > not even be trying to get them to do FreeBSD versions of their > products. I would be trying to get them to do Linux versions, and in > my arguments I would point to the sea of books, magazines and > newspaper articles which all declare that Linux is the finest > invention since 2-ply toilet paper. Given all the supporting evidence > available, I might even succeed. On the other hand, if I went to them > going "FreeBSD! FreeBSD!", I'd only end up slinking back with my tail > between my legs when their questions about the size of our user base, > potential profit margins and tangible evidence that FreeBSD > represented any kind of significant potential profit base were met > with "well, uh, gee. I dunno!" > > Face it - our users love us and we're growing in popularity, but we're > still small. We don't have the million+ estimated users that Linux > does, and it just doesn't make us that attractive a market for any > reasonably large ISV. On the other hand, if they (the ISV) can sell > into both markets with one Linux version, they're much much more > likely to be interested. > > Sorry, that's just the way the world works. :) > > Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?328B7E02.6076>