Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:59:35 -0600
From:      "Andrew L. Gould" <>
Cc:        Anthony Atkielski <>
Subject:   Re: Different OS's? Marketshare
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On Wednesday 23 February 2005 02:24 pm, Anthony Atkielski wrote:
> Andrew L. Gould writes:
> > You can still find FreeBSD at Fry's Electronics and MicroCenter.  I
> > don't know if CompUSA still carries it.  I have mixed feelings
> > about FreeBSD 5.0-5.2.1 being sold in the retail market.
> How so?  Seems like it would be a good idea to me.

5.0-5.2.1 weren't labelled "STABLE".  I worry about the uninformed 
assuming they're buying a "STABLE" version.

> I see that one can still order 5.3 over the Internet.  Since I burned
> my own CDs I don't necessarily need it (although a more permanent CD
> would be nice), but if I did buy it it would be mostly to support the
> project (provided that the project got the money).
> > I see no similarity between Microsoft and Open Source OS vendors on
> > either of these points.
> Perhaps the similarities will become more obvious with time.

Perhaps you should apply for a position at Microsoft.  After all, FUD is 
a Microsoft tactic.

> > Let's face it, without commercialism, Linux development would not
> > have benefited from the likes of IBM or HP. Likewise, without
> > commercialism, there would be very few, if any, *BSD or Linux
> > developers performing open source development for a living. The
> > money has to come from somewhere.
> True.  It's virtually inevitable.

No.  Open Source projects could continue developing at the slow rate 
allowed by developers' spare time.   _Fortunately_, that is not 

> > Fourth, I appreciate all the hard work that goes into developing
> > and packaging an operating system and its related applications.  I
> > am happy to pay for the convenience of an operating system on a
> > DVD.  It's only fair that the vendor be able to recover cost.  If
> > earning a little profit motivates them to continue providing a
> > great service, all the better.
> Fine.  Except that distributors are barely doing anything more than
> repackaging someone else's work.  They didn't write Linux.

The distros (SUSE,  for example) do quite of bit of distro-specific 
development (YAST, for example) and shared development (reiserfs, for 
example).  They also fund Linux development by hiring Linux kernel and 
application developers.  As for the vendors that just sell CD's, the 
prices vary with what the market will pay.  There are plenty of very 
inexpensive sources for the *BSD or Linux CD's; so there's no excuse 
for anyone to pay too much.

It's easy to be cynical; but you'll be much happier if you give reality 
a chance.

Andrew Gould

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>