Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 22 Apr 1999 18:45:13 -0500
From:      "G. Adam Stanislav" <adam@whizkidtech.net>
To:        Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>
Cc:        chat@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: FreeBSD and memetics
Message-ID:  <19990422184513.A248@whizkidtech.net>
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.32.19990422144951.00c60f00@localhost>; from Brett Glass on Thu, Apr 22, 1999 at 03:10:34PM -0600
References:  <4.2.0.32.19990421150131.04614650@localhost> <4.2.0.32.19990420204456.00b25160@localhost> <4.2.0.32.19990420075641.00b1a5f0@localhost> <199904201841.NAA05137@whizkidtech.net> <4.2.0.32.19990420204456.00b25160@localhost> <19990421102449.B224@whizkidtech.net> <4.2.0.32.19990421150131.04614650@localhost> <19990422153804.B2321@whizkidtech.net> <4.2.0.32.19990422144951.00c60f00@localhost>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Apr 22, 1999 at 03:10:34PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
> > have never gotten the impression that FreeBSD was trying to win a popularity
> >contest. :-) Some people appear to be evn worried about it becoming too
> >watered down if it became too popular. 
> 
> This is misguided. It is that which does not reproduce which whithers
> and dies because the resources are consumed by stronger competitors in
> the ecosystem. Memes must replicate or be overwhelmed and die.
> 
> There is nothing whatsoever about the existence or use of more copies that
> would hurt FreeBSD.

No argument there. The more the merrier. I could not care less about the memes
(heck, I have not see anyone taking them seriously for the last ten years), but
I agree it is good to see FreeBSD usage growing.

> >It is not mine to approve or disapprove. I am quite happy with FreeBSD
> >running on my computer. 
> 
> This is a very narrow worldview.

Yes, it is. At least when taken out of context.

> You are neglecting to recognize that,
> if FreeBSD does not flourish, key software applications will not be
> available for it and it will be smothered by Linux.

Of course, FreeBSD can run Linux applications faster than Linux. Isn't that
neat?

> >FreeBSD is a good and solid platform, that is all I care about. It is
> >attracting developers such as myself because of its technical superiority.
> 
> Again, this is fine, so long as you embrace an individual, short-term 
> viewpoint and neglect the big picture.

Again, quoted out of context. It is all I care about as a developer choosing
the right platform for my software. You were concerned about FreeBSD not
attracting developers. It attracted me, without even trying.

> If you have not seen this, then you may not have taken the time to
> become adequately informed about the marketing and positioning of
> FreeBSD (what little is currently done). The slogan "The Power To Serve"
> appears on the FreeBSD Web site and on many of the proomotional
> materials. Representatives of the FreeBSD project and of Walnut
> Creek CD-ROM actively steer desktop users and software developers
> (ALL software developers, even if they develop server software) to
> Linux.

I have taken the time, thank you. Jordan's position has been that there are
many options to choose from and that it is good. I happen to agree, you appear
not to. I see no threat in Linux. Linux serves a totally different purpose
than FreeBSD. And people to whom it serves better purpose should be encouraged
to use Linux. Different strokes for different folks.

Yes, I have seen Jordan suggesting to developers (not ALL, though) to develop
for Linux. Again, taken out of context, that may sound horrible, but within the
context it made perfect sense (and still does). A developer who wants to write
applications for as many users as possible should write them for Linux because
then they can run on both platforms. Applications written for FreeBSD only, on
the other hand, can only run on FreeBSD. This is the irony of being the more
powerful and more flexible OS. Developers should only write FreeBSD specific
software if that software requires the extra power of FreeBSD.

If Jordan tried to convince developers to limit their programs to FreeBSD
even if they could write them to run on both, he would be unethical. He is
doing the right thing.

It is not us vs. them when it comes to FreeBSD and Linux, it is about making
good quality free software available to as many users as possible. We are in
the same boat even if we use different brand of paddles.

> >The big difference was that NeXT was marketted as a
> >commercial system. 
> 
> Not so. NeXT was targeted at academia. On the day of the announcement,
> Jobs proclaimed that educational institutions were a huge market and he
> intended to capture it. The fact was, the market was already saturated
> and there was little demand there for his product.

Academia is commercial market. Everyone who pays for software is commercial
market. Nor is it a bad strategy to target schools. It used to work for Apple
quite well. Hook students on a system, and they will want the same system when
they graduate.

The reasons that Apple is no longer a major player have nothing to do with that
strategy. It is the ridiculous demands they make on resellers. I live in a small
town. I wanted to be an Apple reseller. Sure, as long as I guarantee I'll make
Apple a million dollars a year. Even if every household in my town bought a
brand new Mac every year I could not guarantee it. So, begrudgingly I stuck
with Microsoft. That is, until I discovered FreeBSD.

> >OS/2 was commercial as well. 
> 
> The point being?

The point was discussed in that message at great length. I see no need to
repeat it.

> >FreeBSD is free. The developers of free software have a totally different
> >attitude than commercial software companies. 
> 
> This generalization doesn't wash. The developers of Linux have a very different
> attitude than the leaders of the FreeBSD development effort.

Of course they do. They cater to a different niche.

> >Jordan just summed it up in his
> >message to Licia: He writes software for himself, and you're welcome to use it
> >if you want, but if you don't want to, that's fine.
> 
> An attitude that's fine for the occasional hacker, but inappropriate for the 
> leader of a product development team. 

That attitude is what made him the leader of the team. FreeBSD is developed by
people who want a better OS for themselves, while having no problem sharing it
with others. That is why it is so good.

> >Besides, there is an important subtlety in Jordan's method: People do try
> >Linux, then decide FreeBSD is the way to go. Give the man some credit, he is
> >shrewder than it appears.
> 
> Do not assume that what worked on you -- a sample of one -- is necessarily
> shrewd or the correct way to go. MILLIONS of people choose Linux over
> FreeBSD and stick with it.

So? Millions of people have chosen something other than Buddhism and stick with
it. That does not bother me. In fact, I am happy they found a path that works
for them. We are not Immortals of Highlander: There can be more than one.

> >In my humble opinion (not meaning to start any wars), FreeBSD needs easy to
> >follow docs for its survival. Docs written by writers, not programmers.
> 
> Documentation by no means ensures survival. It certainly didn't for OS/1.

I did not say it ensures survival. I said we need it. I did not imply we need
nothing else. I just think you would be good at writing documentation, and it
would be helpful if you did.

> >Incidentally, I believe that *commercial* developers will be willing to
> >support free software only under the GPL. 
> 
> This is wrongheaded and in fact the opposite of what will actually
> happen if developers are properly educated (something which should
> happen as a result of the proper promotion of FreeBSD). Most commercial developers 
> would not support GPLed software if they knew its intent: to put them out of 
> business. Those that are supporting Linux are naive and/or just stupidly hopping 
> the bandwagon.

It is not the developers I was talking about. It is about those who sign their
paychecks. They are not likely to want to give out the source code to people
who then can use it without letting them know how they improved it. In fact,
I am surprised they give out the source code at all. But as long as they do,
it makes better sense for them (and I am talking about a specific group of
people, not generalizing) to make sure that if anyone does further work on
their code, they have access to it. I don't believe it is going to work for
them in the long though. I expect most commercial developers to go back to
hiding their code again.

Well, I typed this in a hurry. I gotta go see the Matrix... TTFN,

Adam


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990422184513.A248>