Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 01:13:40 +0200 From: ralf@uni-koblenz.de To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: Andrzej Bialecki <abial@nask.pl>, chad@dcfinc.com, Chris Avis <c.avis@rama.com.au>, linux-embedded@waste.org, freebsd-small@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Linux or FreeBSD Message-ID: <19980920011340.B3057@uni-koblenz.de> In-Reply-To: <199809190050.RAA02275@dingo.cdrom.com>; from Mike Smith on Fri, Sep 18, 1998 at 05:50:54PM -0700 References: <19980917032008.E437@uni-koblenz.de> <199809190050.RAA02275@dingo.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 18, 1998 at 05:50:54PM -0700, Mike Smith wrote: > > In most cases the (C) is just a mental problem, not a real one. > > That depends. You're willing to send me a copy of your GPL-tainted > source? You won't mind when I repackage it as the Red Rock and start > selling it against you with only a small fraction of your development > overheads? I don't mind because those parts that are so simple that you can repackage them easily aren't of real value. What isn't included in a GPL'ed source tree is the understanding of all the inner working. You'd not be able to really use all the source. Guess why Cobalt (and others) had to hire people from the Linux comunity in order actually be able to produce a good product within a reasonable timespan. For products like th > I realise that the Qube isn't actually anything remarkable other than > in terms of packaging, but for many products the GPL simply isn't > viable, and this is why most of them don't use Linux. Most notably, > anyone doing anything interesting inside the kernel (eg. GnatBox). > > Still, pick what works for you, and stick with it. Either way, you > often end up so far ahead of where you'd be with a closed embedded > platform that the differences between GPL or BSD codebase is lost in > the noise. 8) For the price / performance ratio and the achieved production cost per piece MIPS was the CPU of choice and the state of the Linux/MIPS kernel required that myself as the MIPS port's main author and a couple of other invested many man-months of software work, so your analysis from above is way wrong. We never feared cloning the GPL'ed software because parts the important parts of the Qube are not the modifications of the kernel but the user interface etc. Finally the knowledge in the products is in the heads of the engineering staff. Any customization for special platforms without that special knowledge is very, very hard. Ralf To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980920011340.B3057>