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: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4E22DD7E.1070404>