From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Mar 24 12:47:22 1995 Return-Path: hackers-owner Received: (from majordom@localhost) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) id MAA19972 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 12:47:22 -0800 Received: from runner.utsa.edu (runner.jpl.utsa.edu [129.115.50.16]) by freefall.cdrom.com (8.6.10/8.6.6) with SMTP id MAA19963 for ; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 12:47:20 -0800 Received: by runner.utsa.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4) id AA17184; Fri, 24 Mar 1995 14:47:07 -0600 From: ferovick@runner.jpl.utsa.edu (David C Ferovick) Message-Id: <9503242047.AA17184@runner.utsa.edu> Subject: Re: A "FreeBSD" Daemon To: jkh@freefall.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Date: Fri, 24 Mar 1995 14:47:07 -0600 (CST) Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.org In-Reply-To: <15025.796069393@freefall.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Mar 24, 95 10:23:13 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23beta2] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Length: 1001 Sender: hackers-owner@FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk > > > I agree. Out of the three, I would say "NetBSD" has the nicest ring > > to it. "FreeBSD" and "Linux" don't have that "professional" sound to > > them. I suppose you could go around telling everyone not to judge a book > > by its cover, but it would be easier just to come up with a nicer cover. :) > > I'd say we've already got far too much brand identification with the old > name. Trying to change it now, after almost 2 years, would be hellish. > No thank you! :-) > > Jordan > It would be hellish, but I am sure that you could gain alot from it. I have had three different chances to run FreeBSD on systems in the past, to support a commercial userbase, and each time I was forced to choose NetBSD or BSDI instead, because the people involved didn't think it was a good idea to run a OS with the word 'Free' in it when you are charging people to use it.. I'm sure this argument is much more widespread than just the three incidents I am talking about. Dave Ferovick