Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 19:45:21 -0500 From: Dennis <dennis@etinc.com> To: "Julian Stacey Jhs@jhs.muc.de" <jhs@jhs.muc.de> Cc: Boris <koester@x-itec.de>, Murray Stokely <murray@osd.bsdi.com>, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD vs Linux, Solaris, and NT Message-ID: <5.0.0.25.0.20001220192150.01f42450@mail.etinc.com> In-Reply-To: <200012200059.eBK0wCN02480@jhs.muc.de> References: <Message from Dennis <dennis@etinc.com> <5.0.0.25.0.20001219111044.020739e0@mail.etinc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 07:58 PM 12/19/2000, Julian Stacey Jhs@jhs.muc.de wrote: >Dennis wrote to Boris et all: > > > > >Device Drivers > > >-------------- > > >I don=B4t like binary only device drivers. The code of an operating > > >system is more complex than a driver. if a company does not want to > > >publish the sourcecode, the should go away. > > > > You've lost all credibility here. Well supported device drivers should= not > > require source. I'd prefer a commercial (preferably the manufacters) > > support other than some guy in the ural mountains who fixes things IF he > > can get a card with a problem and IF he can duplicate the problem and IF > > hes a good enough coder to get it done. > > > "hacker mentality" is not mainstream. 98% of people dont have a clue= what > >`Mainstream' is a target some seek to avoid. Micro$oft exemplifies=20 >mainstream. Your "mentality" has caused you to alienate yourselves from the rest of the= =20 world, which serves your ego but not the FreeBSD community. Acts such as:: 1) refusing to fix the kernel Make to work properly with binary modules 2) making statements like "if i dont get source i dont want it" 3) taking every opportunity to mock those who dont provide source indicate to corporate america that you have no interest in having them=20 develop significant products for Freebsd A successful strategy is to encourage all developers to contribute=20 products, binary or source, and let end users decide which products to buy= =20 or use. With such an inclusive strategy, customers have choices. with=20 binary distributions you have competition, with source everything is the= same. Binary distributions are not about piracy as much as they are maintaining a= =20 feature advantage over your competitors. If you provide source with=20 improved features, someone will port it to the cheapest hardware available= =20 and then you end up competing with your own technologies.on other hardware= =20 and you lose your margins. There is no incentive for companies to invest resources in developing=20 better software for their FreeBSD based products, because there is no=20 guarantee that people have to buy their boards to utilize it (if they can= =20 easily be ported to others). so, there is no corporate-driven progress. Why= =20 should D link provide their load balancing technology to freebsd if you can= =20 just use it on an intel or 3com card? they are in the business of selling=20 boards, not helping their competitors sell boards. db To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5.0.0.25.0.20001220192150.01f42450>