Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1998 01:44:15 -0400 From: "Stuart Krivis" <stuart@krivis.com> To: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Advocates, speak up! (re: just something to say) Message-ID: <199807040548.BAA09389@junior.apk.net> In-Reply-To: <199807040359.VAA02226@softweyr.com> References: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980703190810.21406A-100000@shell6.ba.best.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 3 Jul 98, at 21:59, Wes Peters wrote: > Frank Pawlak called me yesterday to chat about what is happening, and what > isn't, in FreeBSD-Advocacy. As we talked, we decided success stories like > the above are *exactly* what we need to convince business people (i.e. > "suits") that FreeBSD is a suitable choice for *their* business. > > Managers may not be the smartest people in the world -- if they were, > they'd be kernel VM developers -- but they are extremely risk averse. In > other words, they don't want to stick their necks out. In order for them > to say yes to using FreeBSD, they want to see two things: > > 1) A business case. How will using FreeBSD improve their bottom line, > versus say NT or Linux on a server, or Linux, VxWorks, QNX, LynxOS, > etc. in an embedded system? > > 2) A success story (or 20). They want to make sure they're NOT breaking > new ground; that is "risk taking," which is severely punished in most > (US, at least) companies. I see the case as more "NT vs. unix." :-) They're very different mindsets. FreeBSD, Linux, Solaris x86, SCO, BSDI, Banyan - they're all kindred. They all allow you to work the way _you_ want to work. NT really does force you to work the way that MS has decided you will work. -- Stuart Krivis stuart@krivis.com [Team APK] 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?199807040548.BAA09389>