Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 17 Jul 2011 20:02:54 +0700
From:      =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22C=2E_Bergstr=F6m=22?= <cbergstrom@pathscale.com>
Cc:        freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Lennart Poettering: BSD Isn't Relevant Anymore
Message-ID:  <4E22DD7E.1070404@pathscale.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E22D8DA.4030001@nagual.nl>
References:  <20110717071059.25971662@scorpio>	<CAFt_eMoMCWsVXotaS1rTOHuGmuULBkt-GA71LNNFqVekbzxV3g@mail.gmail.com> <4E22D8DA.4030001@nagual.nl>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
  On 07/17/11 07:43 PM, Dick Hoogendijk wrote:
> Op 17-7-2011 14:17 schreef Subbsd:
>> community decreases. It is a pity that many developers of FreeBSD have
>> left in Apple, the small part works over {NET,OPEN,DRAGONFLY}.BSD but
>> as a whole it already absolutely small small groups of people.
> And do you feel this will be the end of FreeBSD?
I doubt that *BSD will *end*, but at which point does lack of usage make 
an OS irrelevant?

1) Is it used in production?  If so does it serve a critical role?
2) What commercial support options are available?  (Also what popular 
commercial/proprietary software are available )
3) How well is it keeping pace with existing sw and hw technologies?
4) How focused and productive is the development community?

I have some personal views on the above, but I consider *BSD severely 
lacking in a few areas.  (No I can't personally help and only kick these 
questions off from the sidelines)

Software typically exists to solve a problem.  What problem is *BSD 
trying to solve?  If something serves a purpose then there should be no 
denying it's future relevance.




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E22DD7E.1070404>