From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 6 04:46:02 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D655106566C; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 04:46:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from davidxu@freebsd.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 284E78FC18; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 04:46:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from xyf.my.dom (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p064k0ip062296; Thu, 6 Jan 2011 04:46:01 GMT (envelope-from davidxu@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <4D254909.5040604@freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 12:46:01 +0800 From: David Xu User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20100630) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Scott Long References: <20110103220153.69cf59e0@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110104082252.45bb5e7f@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110105124045.6a0ddd1a@kan.dnsalias.net> <20110105175926.GA2101@vniz.net> <20110106024403.GB22349@vniz.net> <8A69DE05-A433-4D40-8E63-8F06215606F2@samsco.org> In-Reply-To: <8A69DE05-A433-4D40-8E63-8F06215606F2@samsco.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux kernel compatability X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2011 04:46:02 -0000 Scott Long wrote: > On Jan 5, 2011, at 7:44 PM, Andrey Chernov wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 05:17:21PM -0700, Scott Long wrote: >>>> We have not been marginalized in this space because we have an emulator. We just don't have the marketshare in many areas. If anything, these emulators improve our marketshare. >>> I agree entirely. Companies look at marketshare and ability to turn more revenue than costs (i.e. profit). Like Jeff, I've had my share of dealing with companies who have made a conscious to support or not support FreeBSD based on those factors. Petitions and letters sound great on Slashdot, but don't work in the real world. Emulation increases marketshare. >> Emulation decreases our marketshare, presenting us like >> not-so-good-but-trying Linux clone, so, for this reason alone, every >> serious company will put its money on Linux product running on real Linux >> instead of thinking about porting it into FreeBSD. >> > > I'm sorry, this simply hasn't been true in my experience. I've worked with companies that have decided to support FreeBSD, and I've worked with companies that have decided not to support FreeBSD. Emulation has never been used as an excuse to not support FreeBSD. It's purely a cost/benefit decision. > > Scott > Vendor vs User, two sides. Here, if one is native, another is emulation, people would run native version rather than emulation.