Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2010 09:31:38 -0500 From: Rick N <solarux@hotmail.com> To: <freebsd-chat@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: FreeBSD Popularity Message-ID: <BAY113-W4892373070B4C461BA50E0A1360@phx.gbl> In-Reply-To: <20100306122651.GA46491@orange.esperance-linux.co.uk> References: <4B8ABAB3.1060003@gamozo.org>, <20100228201322.GA82783@rwxrwxrwx.net>, <20100301053514.GA5440@orange.esperance-linux.co.uk>, <11167f521003060044n798a2b3dj23f13f9b9ba5cdbb@mail.gmail.com>, <20100306122651.GA46491@orange.esperance-linux.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
somewhere=2C...=2C According to Gates=2C GPLd software (Linux): "makes it impossible for a commercial company to use any of that work or bu= ild on any of that work. So what you saw with TCP/IP or Sendmail=2C NFS=2C.= ..=2C or the browser could never happen." I suppose this is exactly why BIG corps like Apple=2Cand Juniper=2C and ..= .=2C chose *BSD code initially=2C=20 But am I glad that Linux's GPL is protecting my bank card in some ATM ? -c= areful now. :) > Date: Sat=2C 6 Mar 2010 12:26:51 +0000 > From: frank@shute.org.uk > To: sfourman@gmail.com > CC: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org=3B falkman@gamozo.org > Subject: Re: FreeBSD Popularity >=20 > On Sat=2C Mar 06=2C 2010 at 02:44:47AM -0600=2C Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: > > > > > To be honest=2C I think the licence puts off most of the commercial > > > entities. Which is a *good* thing. > > > > >=20 > > Explain your point on this? BSD is supposed to be commercial friendly. > >=20 > > Sam Fourman Jr. >=20 > I saw Linux go from a sort of hobbiest system to what it is now=2C where > most of the patches come from RedHat=2C IBM and Novell. >=20 > These patches are focussed on whatever those big companies are > focussed on ATM which doesn't necessarily coincide with what the > user base wants. >=20 > For instance=2C who cares that Linux is patched to run on IBM Z-series? >=20 > IBM. Not me. >=20 > So you get a lot of cruft in the kernel which has nothing to do with > the desires of the user base but it's what a PHB at IBM wants. >=20 > Yes=2C there are companies whom use and support FreeBSD but their say > on FreeBSD development is limited and usually welcome. I'm thinking of > Juniper. >=20 > My belief is that the FreeBSD license puts off the big commercial > players because it's written in clear English and can be written on > half a page of A4. >=20 > This puts the ball in the PHB's court unlike the GPL's reams of > legalese which is punted along to the legal department. i.e the PHB > can pass the buck and hence GPL software is used. >=20 > That's just a guess. I can't think why a license=2C that allows more > freedom than an obtuse license that is dependent on the uncertain > interpretation of a judge=2C is used.=20 >=20 >=20 > Regards=2C >=20 > --=20 >=20 > Frank >=20 > Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-chat@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-chat > To unsubscribe=2C send any mail to "freebsd-chat-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" =20 _________________________________________________________________ Check your Hotmail from your phone.=20 http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=3D9712957=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BAY113-W4892373070B4C461BA50E0A1360>