Date: Fri, 19 Mar 1999 17:26:53 -0700 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: Mark Diekhans <markd@Grizzly.COM> Cc: advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Netscape browser Message-ID: <4.1.19990319171820.00c28ed0@localhost> In-Reply-To: <199903192134.NAA19894@osprey.grizzly.com> References: <4.1.19990319134858.03fd24e0@localhost> <4.1.19990319114734.00b794b0@localhost> <4.1.19990319103804.00a8ec60@localhost> <4.1.19990319114734.00b794b0@localhost> <4.1.19990319134858.03fd24e0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 01:34 PM 3/19/99 -0800, Mark Diekhans wrote: >>Because the incremental cost of putting it on the disk is roughly zero, and >>every user who has to call in and ask how to load it explicitly represents >>a potential support call and hence an expense. > >The incremental cost is not zero, there is a lot more to manufacturing than >cutting a CD-ROM (cheaper than dirt); its the testing of an additional >platform. Having to test the emulator installation adds signficantly >to this cost. Not very much. Remember, the disk foundries don't do huge amounts of testing, and this one small part of a very large distribution. >If there where only one `Linux', it would probably be >more costly than testing the application. Given that there are several >`Linux' and `Linux' in practice is a testing nightmare, the cost of testing >the emulator would be very high. Non sequitur. The publisher of each distribution would only test his distribution. >> The user might even give >>up and SWITCH to FreeBSD if the Linux vendor is not helpful. Hence, it is >>in the Linux vendor's best interest to include the emulator. > >Huh? Why would a vendor be movated to make their product look bad? They'd be motivated to make it look GOOD by including the emulator. >>It's not a long shot at all; it's really the biggest chance FreeBSD has >>to leverage the success of Linux. Linux emulation, by contrast, was the >>long shot -- and in fact a very bad strategy. He who emulates, suffocates. > >I see little agreement with this assertion; and my experience doesn't >agree either. You claim to write software. But have you ever marketed it? Are you aware of what tactics have actually succeeded out there in the cold, hard, real world? I'd venture to say that you're refusing to learn from history and hence are doomed to repeat it. FreeBSD == the OS/2 of the free software world. >You are failing to see the difference; a development environment would allow >producing the both binaries at lower cost than a runtime installation of the >emulator. It would still be doubtful that this would be enough to get them >to do the port without more market pressure. If they create two binaries, that's still two SKUs. Twice as many products in inventory; twice as many to ship. Twice as much of a loss per revision. And since the FreeBSD version will sell fewer copies than the Linux version, SOMEONE will get the bright idea of dropping the FreeBSD one. Sorry, but the binary must be for FreeBSD and ONLY for FreeBSD, or it's a net loss. >>>In my personal experience, Linux emulation has been one of the best faetures >>>in terms of promoting FreeBSD to individual users. >> >>Alas, every time you do that, FreeBSD gets another strike against it >>in the eyes of application developers. > >No, what I have another user who is using FreeBSD instead of Linux. (I did >lose several to inferior laptop support). Granted, its not as good as having >them use FreeBSD and FreeBSD native apps, but its better than using Linux and >Linux native apps (which is better than Windozes and Windozes apps). It's not good for the platform. The only thing that ultimately benefits the platform is sales of apps compiled specifically for that platform. >I have been doing commercial software development for 19 years and my >experience does not agree with this assertion. That's the problem: you've been doing development, not marketing or sales. And you haven't followed the economics of the software industry, as I have for 20 years. I hate to be the voice of pragmatism here, but the strategy you're suggesting is not a winning one. --Brett 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?4.1.19990319171820.00c28ed0>